| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 02.01.16 19:01l 1281 Lines 48333 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : AMSATBB113
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V11 3
Path: IW8PGT<CX2SA
Sent: 160102/1647Z @:CX2SA.SAL.URY.SOAM #:36930 [Salto] FBB7.00e $:AMSATBB113
From: CX2SA@CX2SA.SAL.URY.SOAM
To : SATDIG@WW
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Waiting for Solar Panel Efficiency (Ha!) rebuttal
(Robert Bruninga)
2. Re: Waiting for Solar Panel Efficiency (Ha!) rebuttal
(Wouter Weggelaar)
3. Re: [isrohams] Re: [amsatindia] New Year Greetings
(mrraghav@xxxx.xxx.xxx
4. Re: Waiting for Solar Panel Efficiency (Ha!) rebuttal
(Francesco Messineo)
5. Re: Waiting for Solar Panel Efficiency (Ha!) rebuttal (Andre)
6. Re: Waiting for Solar Panel Efficiency (Ha!) rebuttal
(Glenn Anderson)
7. Re: Waiting for Solar Panel Efficiency (Ha!) Grid stability
(Robert Bruninga)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Fri, 1 Jan 2016 16:14:43 -0500
From: Robert Bruninga <bruninga@xxxx.xxx>
To: amsat bb <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Waiting for Solar Panel Efficiency (Ha!)
rebuttal
Message-ID:
<CALdCfN++2AGzPCyBbxk-jwNjXuXeeEzZywXyXkxTSqwwn216NQ@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
> from a technical point of view there is a huge reason
> to hold off on all these extra feed-ins (net-metering).
> And that simple reason is grid stability.
True and false....
It is true that the grid of 1970 has to evolve to avoid problems with grid
stability. But they have been aware of these problems and have been
evolving for the last 40 years to get away from the catastrophic results of
business as usual and resulting half-country blackouts.
Although the utilities are glacially slow to adapt, the growth of solar and
wind has also been glacially slow because people just resist change even
when it is to their advantage. But the GRID has seen it coming and has
been getting ready.
10 years ago, they said the grid will go unstable above 2% solar (because
they NEVER even looked at the weather to estimate tomorrow's load). Now
the weather model is an excellent forcaster of available power an dload.
Then 5 years ago they were saying the grid would go unstable at 10%.
(Absolutely true if they still did nothing to improve their systems from
the 1970s way of dispatching power But they have not been sitting still).
Guess what, Hawaii has now passed 40% solar and the grid has still not gone
unstable because every day they are improving how they manage the grid.
Back in 2013, Germany exceeded 60% solar and wind and their grid held up
fine. Then this year, the Netherlands peaked at 100% solar/wind and their
grid did just fine. The US can easily keep up with the evolving grid as
long as we dont get held back by the fossil fuel industry's opposition.
So of course, the stability of the grid is a concern, but that is why we
have some of the best EE's on the planet working in parallel for 3 decades
with renwewable growth to stay ahead of the variability of renewable clean
power.
So I don't fault anyone for commenting on the stability of the grid, but it
is always last year's news and not keeping up with the day to day march
toward cleaner power.
I attended an IEEE International Conference on Energy last year and
expected to hear gloom and doom. I heard exactlly the opposite. Every
paper showing techinques, and how to achieve stability and renewable
growth were ten times as many as the few claiming doom. And most papers
were showing how easy it was with positiv results and others how we will be
able to grow the changes to make the grid more responsive.
So keep a jaundiced ear to repetitions of decades or even last year's dire
predictions... the world is changing despite the billions of dollars being
spent by the fossil fuel industry to make sure they remain on top.
Bob, Wb4APR
> So regardless of any tariff schemes and/or the power companies trying to
> keep their market, there is a substantial technical hurdle. I don't know
> how it is in the US, but I did some research during an internship on this
> in The Netherlands, and as a result, some kinds of inverters were outlawed
> in the EU because they were really dangerous to the grid stability, and
> also not safe in the end when instabilities did occur.
> (and not all of those were made in china....)
> Are they discouraging a growth beyond a certain size just to prevent this
> issue?
>
> Maybe this is substantially different in the US, since the grid looks
> completely different.
>
>
> Wouter PA3WEG
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 1, 2016 at 5:36 PM, Burns Fisher <burns@xxxxxx.xx> wrote:
>
>> I guess there are a lot of folks interested in this even though it is only
>> peripherally related to satellites...I hope there are not too many
>> objections.
>>
>> But I wanted to ask if anyone has heard this rumor: After a certain
>> number
>> of solar connections, power companies will no longer be required to do net
>> metering. I don't know whether a) they would just not allow any more new
>> installations with backfeed at all or b) for new installations they would
>> only pay wholesale, or c) somehow they average retail and wholesale prices
>> for everyone who is backfeeding.
>>
>> I can surely understand why a power company would WANT to do that. They
>> are usually getting power that they have to pay extra for at a time when
>> they need it less. But it certainly reduces some of the financial
>> incentive to install, if true. Anyone know more? It would probably
>> differ
>> by state...
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Burns W2BFJ
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 1, 2016 at 11:21 AM, Robert Bruninga <bruninga@xxxx.xxx>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > > If the project is not operating by now, it'll cost 30% more after
>> > midnight.
>> >
>> > No. The 30% federal tax incentive was to end by the end of 2016, not the
>> > beginning. AND does'nt matter anyway, since the do-nothing congress
>> > actually included an extenaion in the spending bill.
>> >
>> > > Putting solar on an asphalt roof ... is a bad idea. Not a place to
>> screw
>> > up.
>> >
>> > Use a reputable contractor with guarantee. They know how to do it
>> right.
>> >
>> > > 42 panels 50 lbs per (for 11 kW system)...
>> > > Remember statics and dynamics??
>> > > ... bracing rafters in a crawlspace is a mug's game.
>> > > In Florida in summer? Fatal.
>> >
>> > 50 lbs per panel over 18 sqft is only a load of 2.8 lbs per square foot
>> > and is insignificant compared to the required building code roof design
>> > figure of typically 30 psf. (Though in Florida the snow load is
>> considered
>> > 0). The good news elsewhere is that solar panels melt snow far faster
>> than
>> > a normal roof, so there is no multiday buildup and icing load...
>> >
>> > > Today as of 3pm EDT the system produced 23 kWh.
>> > > Best day so far was 100% FL sunshine and a COLD day: 82 kWh.
>> >
>> > Congratulations, sounds like you did it anyway...
>> >
>> > > HF RFI? Undetectable.
>> >
>> > Thanks, that is great news!
>> >
>> > > I got the last (3) 3.8kW transformer based inverters in stock.
>> > > SMA makes nice gear. Cadwelds, IMC 3/4" conduit.
>> >
>> > I was totally shocked when I ordered an SMA inverter to add to my other
>> > three XANTREX ones which only weighted 25 lbs. The SMA was so heavy I
>> had
>> > to invite my son to dinner just to get help getting it from the porch to
>> > inside the house! Then had to feed him again a week later to help lift
>> it
>> > into place. I think it is over 100 lbs? And compared to the XANTREX,
>> there
>> > were may nitpicks I did not like about the SMA at all.
>> >
>> > But then of course, XANTREX doesn't make grid-tie inverters any more and
>> > SMA does seem to have very good reviews.
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 12:25 PM, Bob <WB4SON@xxxxx.xxx> wrote:
>> >
>> > > > Sort of off the AMSAT topic, but the most recent estimate is that
>> about
>> > > 20
>> > > > gigawatts of solar will be added in 2016 -- almost doubling the
>> total
>> > > > installed capacity of US solar power. This is being primarily
>> driven
>> > by
>> > > > residential installations. Utility-scale installations are actually
>> > down
>> > > > 5%.
>> > > >
>> > > > One thing that was keeping mass market efficiency down was a glut of
>> > > > production capability that existed through 2014. Manufactures were
>> not
>> > > > keen on investing in new processes at the same time they were going
>> out
>> > > of
>> > > > business or consolidating. That glut has been drying up, prompting
>> > Elon
>> > > > Musk's to build a $1 billion dollar factory in Buffalo NY which will
>> > > > produce 1 GW of panels annually by the end of 2016. Those panels
>> are
>> > > > expected to be 22.1% efficient. That's a pretty impressive gain in
>> > > > efficiency.
>> > > >
>> > > > Often times market conditions, not technology, dictates what reaches
>> > the
>> > > > mass market, and that has most certainly been the case in the solar
>> > > > industry. That 50% increase in panel efficiency doesn't necessarily
>> > mean
>> > > > that the cost per watt will be reduced in the short term -- those
>> > panels
>> > > > may simply sell for 50% more.
>> > > >
>> > > > 73, Bob, WB4SON
>> > > >
>> > > > On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 6:07 AM, Nick Pugh wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >> Good point Bob but include the real estate cost in to the equation
>> > and
>> > > >> they improve.
>> > > >> nick
>> > > >>
>> > > >> -----Original Message-----
>> > > >> From: AMSAT-BB [On Behalf Of Robert Bruninga
>> > > >> Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2015 11:06 AM
>> > > >> To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
>> > > >> Subject: [amsat-bb] Waiting for Solar Panel Efficiency (Ha!)
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Compare the cost and efficiency of solar panels for cubesats and
>> for
>> > > your
>> > > >> house:
>> > > >>
>> > > >> http://aprs.org/Energy/solar/efficiency-comparison-cost.png
>> > > >>
>> > >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
>> > to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership.
>> Opinions
>> > expressed
>> > are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
>> > AMSAT-NA.
>> > Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
>> program!
>> > Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership.
>> Opinions expressed
>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
>> AMSAT-NA.
>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
>> Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>>
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Fri, 1 Jan 2016 23:59:14 +0100
From: Wouter Weggelaar <wouterweg@xxxxx.xxx>
To: Robert Bruninga <bruninga@xxxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat bb <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Waiting for Solar Panel Efficiency (Ha!)
rebuttal
Message-ID:
<CAKXf1rHPYOS2n1B+6pCoYoFH_XYRUxXnEM-oJjqeUL8rO22jTg@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Hi Bob, agreed on almost all points but:
1) I Live in the Netherlands. I had no idea you would see 40% decentralized
as "high". My research was for 90 - 100%, and was 10 years ago. The area I
live in has received some major upgrades to the grid, but there are places
where decentralized production would still cause problems because of
(local) instabilities.
2) We have lots of greenhouses in my area. The production of power by the
farmers (=decentralized) grew from 150MW in 2005 to 800MW in 2010. last
years numbers have not been published yet. farmers generate around 13% of
the countries power with local gas turbines, the CO2 is piped into the
greenhouses to make the crop grow, and the heat is used to heat the
greenhouses and neighboring houses etc. This 13% is NOT renewable.
3) The energy need of The Netherlands hardly changes over the year, since
we do not have ACs in homes, and only newer office buildings are getting
power efficient ones. Older buildings just don't have AC. We actually need
slightly more power in the winter, since we need more lighting as it gets
dark earlier.
4) When the sun shines and it is still cold (spring) we get peak
PhotoVoltaic production. we have to dial down our gas fired plants to
accommodate for this. Fortunately, the gas plants are fast in control, so
clouds or change in weather can be catered for. Lots of our coal plants
have been shut in the 80s/90s, although some "base load" coal plants are
still in operation, and a new one is being built as well.
5) There is no reason in The Netherlands to not have extra renewable energy
sources. I really don't know how your "fossil fuel industry's opposition"
can keep you from putting solar panels on your roof. I think everyone
should!
6) I think you have a different definition of grid stability. What I tested
is the following: If the power goes away in a city that runs on 90% local
production, that may have a very good reason. You want the power to go down
in case a short circuit exists or there is a transformer fault somewhere.
Or when you want to work on an isolated section of the grid. In case of our
100% Photovoltaic and wind inverter case, even if the breaker in the block
transformer goes, all there inverters will happily continue supplying
power. They periodically check if the "grid" is still there by switching
off their own inverter and measuring the line. In case of, say, 100
inverters, you can almost guarantee that the 99 others will make sure that
"grid" is there during the measurement period. Now, there things are all
synchronizing to the "grid" that in this case is just your 99 neighbors. so
the frequency can drift away and they will all happily drift with with each
other. The cheap models I tested had two very dangerous features:
A - they sensed each other as valid grid voltage, leaving an engineer
unable to cut the power on a section of line. There was no way to shut
these suckers off in case you need to work at the substation safely
B - the grid frequency (50Hz here) would run away upwards until there were
MOSFets flying everywhere. We literally had a dozen kill themselves when we
did that experiment. It was huge fun though, hearing them scream ;)
7) Our national grid has had 99.9999% uptime over the last years, with 4
interruptions in 2014.
Lastly, unfortunately my country is still pathetic in using solar power. we
should really be doing more here and world-wide. Yes, we peaked at 100%,
for a very short time though ;)
In conclusion: there may be technical problems with decentralized power
production that may lead to a feed-in stop by the power company. But these
are local stops and backed up by engineers. not bankers. Again, all my
arguments are technical for my local country and your mileage may vary.
73
Wouter PA3WEG
On Fri, Jan 1, 2016 at 10:14 PM, Robert Bruninga <bruninga@xxxx.xxx> wrote:
> > from a technical point of view there is a huge reason
> > to hold off on all these extra feed-ins (net-metering).
> > And that simple reason is grid stability.
>
> True and false....
>
> It is true that the grid of 1970 has to evolve to avoid problems with grid
> stability. But they have been aware of these problems and have been
> evolving for the last 40 years to get away from the catastrophic results of
> business as usual and resulting half-country blackouts.
>
> Although the utilities are glacially slow to adapt, the growth of solar and
> wind has also been glacially slow because people just resist change even
> when it is to their advantage. But the GRID has seen it coming and has
> been getting ready.
>
> 10 years ago, they said the grid will go unstable above 2% solar (because
> they NEVER even looked at the weather to estimate tomorrow's load). Now
> the weather model is an excellent forcaster of available power an dload.
> Then 5 years ago they were saying the grid would go unstable at 10%.
> (Absolutely true if they still did nothing to improve their systems from
> the 1970s way of dispatching power But they have not been sitting still).
>
> Guess what, Hawaii has now passed 40% solar and the grid has still not gone
> unstable because every day they are improving how they manage the grid.
> Back in 2013, Germany exceeded 60% solar and wind and their grid held up
> fine. Then this year, the Netherlands peaked at 100% solar/wind and their
> grid did just fine. The US can easily keep up with the evolving grid as
> long as we dont get held back by the fossil fuel industry's opposition.
>
> So of course, the stability of the grid is a concern, but that is why we
> have some of the best EE's on the planet working in parallel for 3 decades
> with renwewable growth to stay ahead of the variability of renewable clean
> power.
>
> So I don't fault anyone for commenting on the stability of the grid, but it
> is always last year's news and not keeping up with the day to day march
> toward cleaner power.
>
> I attended an IEEE International Conference on Energy last year and
> expected to hear gloom and doom. I heard exactlly the opposite. Every
> paper showing techinques, and how to achieve stability and renewable
> growth were ten times as many as the few claiming doom. And most papers
> were showing how easy it was with positiv results and others how we will be
> able to grow the changes to make the grid more responsive.
>
> So keep a jaundiced ear to repetitions of decades or even last year's dire
> predictions... the world is changing despite the billions of dollars being
> spent by the fossil fuel industry to make sure they remain on top.
>
> Bob, Wb4APR
>
>
>
>
> > So regardless of any tariff schemes and/or the power companies trying to
> > keep their market, there is a substantial technical hurdle. I don't know
> > how it is in the US, but I did some research during an internship on this
> > in The Netherlands, and as a result, some kinds of inverters were
> outlawed
> > in the EU because they were really dangerous to the grid stability, and
> > also not safe in the end when instabilities did occur.
> > (and not all of those were made in china....)
> > Are they discouraging a growth beyond a certain size just to prevent this
> > issue?
> >
> > Maybe this is substantially different in the US, since the grid looks
> > completely different.
> >
> >
> > Wouter PA3WEG
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 1, 2016 at 5:36 PM, Burns Fisher <burns@xxxxxx.xx> wrote:
> >
> >> I guess there are a lot of folks interested in this even though it is
> only
> >> peripherally related to satellites...I hope there are not too many
> >> objections.
> >>
> >> But I wanted to ask if anyone has heard this rumor: After a certain
> >> number
> >> of solar connections, power companies will no longer be required to do
> net
> >> metering. I don't know whether a) they would just not allow any more
> new
> >> installations with backfeed at all or b) for new installations they
> would
> >> only pay wholesale, or c) somehow they average retail and wholesale
> prices
> >> for everyone who is backfeeding.
> >>
> >> I can surely understand why a power company would WANT to do that. They
> >> are usually getting power that they have to pay extra for at a time when
> >> they need it less. But it certainly reduces some of the financial
> >> incentive to install, if true. Anyone know more? It would probably
> >> differ
> >> by state...
> >>
> >> 73,
> >>
> >> Burns W2BFJ
> >>
> >> On Fri, Jan 1, 2016 at 11:21 AM, Robert Bruninga <bruninga@xxxx.xxx>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > > If the project is not operating by now, it'll cost 30% more after
> >> > midnight.
> >> >
> >> > No. The 30% federal tax incentive was to end by the end of 2016, not
> the
> >> > beginning. AND does'nt matter anyway, since the do-nothing congress
> >> > actually included an extenaion in the spending bill.
> >> >
> >> > > Putting solar on an asphalt roof ... is a bad idea. Not a place to
> >> screw
> >> > up.
> >> >
> >> > Use a reputable contractor with guarantee. They know how to do it
> >> right.
> >> >
> >> > > 42 panels 50 lbs per (for 11 kW system)...
> >> > > Remember statics and dynamics??
> >> > > ... bracing rafters in a crawlspace is a mug's game.
> >> > > In Florida in summer? Fatal.
> >> >
> >> > 50 lbs per panel over 18 sqft is only a load of 2.8 lbs per square
> foot
> >> > and is insignificant compared to the required building code roof
> design
> >> > figure of typically 30 psf. (Though in Florida the snow load is
> >> considered
> >> > 0). The good news elsewhere is that solar panels melt snow far faster
> >> than
> >> > a normal roof, so there is no multiday buildup and icing load...
> >> >
> >> > > Today as of 3pm EDT the system produced 23 kWh.
> >> > > Best day so far was 100% FL sunshine and a COLD day: 82 kWh.
> >> >
> >> > Congratulations, sounds like you did it anyway...
> >> >
> >> > > HF RFI? Undetectable.
> >> >
> >> > Thanks, that is great news!
> >> >
> >> > > I got the last (3) 3.8kW transformer based inverters in stock.
> >> > > SMA makes nice gear. Cadwelds, IMC 3/4" conduit.
> >> >
> >> > I was totally shocked when I ordered an SMA inverter to add to my
> other
> >> > three XANTREX ones which only weighted 25 lbs. The SMA was so heavy I
> >> had
> >> > to invite my son to dinner just to get help getting it from the porch
> to
> >> > inside the house! Then had to feed him again a week later to help
> lift
> >> it
> >> > into place. I think it is over 100 lbs? And compared to the XANTREX,
> >> there
> >> > were may nitpicks I did not like about the SMA at all.
> >> >
> >> > But then of course, XANTREX doesn't make grid-tie inverters any more
> and
> >> > SMA does seem to have very good reviews.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 12:25 PM, Bob <WB4SON@xxxxx.xxx> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > > Sort of off the AMSAT topic, but the most recent estimate is that
> >> about
> >> > > 20
> >> > > > gigawatts of solar will be added in 2016 -- almost doubling the
> >> total
> >> > > > installed capacity of US solar power. This is being primarily
> >> driven
> >> > by
> >> > > > residential installations. Utility-scale installations are
> actually
> >> > down
> >> > > > 5%.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > One thing that was keeping mass market efficiency down was a glut
> of
> >> > > > production capability that existed through 2014. Manufactures
> were
> >> not
> >> > > > keen on investing in new processes at the same time they were
> going
> >> out
> >> > > of
> >> > > > business or consolidating. That glut has been drying up,
> prompting
> >> > Elon
> >> > > > Musk's to build a $1 billion dollar factory in Buffalo NY which
> will
> >> > > > produce 1 GW of panels annually by the end of 2016. Those panels
> >> are
> >> > > > expected to be 22.1% efficient. That's a pretty impressive gain
> in
> >> > > > efficiency.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Often times market conditions, not technology, dictates what
> reaches
> >> > the
> >> > > > mass market, and that has most certainly been the case in the
> solar
> >> > > > industry. That 50% increase in panel efficiency doesn't
> necessarily
> >> > mean
> >> > > > that the cost per watt will be reduced in the short term -- those
> >> > panels
> >> > > > may simply sell for 50% more.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > 73, Bob, WB4SON
> >> > > >
> >> > > > On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 6:07 AM, Nick Pugh wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > >> Good point Bob but include the real estate cost in to the
> equation
> >> > and
> >> > > >> they improve.
> >> > > >> nick
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> -----Original Message-----
> >> > > >> From: AMSAT-BB [On Behalf Of Robert Bruninga
> >> > > >> Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2015 11:06 AM
> >> > > >> To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
> >> > > >> Subject: [amsat-bb] Waiting for Solar Panel Efficiency (Ha!)
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> Compare the cost and efficiency of solar panels for cubesats and
> >> for
> >> > > your
> >> > > >> house:
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> http://aprs.org/Energy/solar/efficiency-comparison-cost.png
> >> > > >>
> >> > >
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
> >> > to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership.
> >> Opinions
> >> > expressed
> >> > are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views
> of
> >> > AMSAT-NA.
> >> > Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
> >> program!
> >> > Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
> >> >
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
> >> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership.
> >> Opinions expressed
> >> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
> >> AMSAT-NA.
> >> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
> program!
> >> Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
> >>
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions
> expressed
> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
> AMSAT-NA.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Sat, 02 Jan 2016 10:36:38 +0530
From: mrraghav@xxxx.xxx.xx
To: "'V.MURALI KRISHNA' vmk@xxxx.xxx.xx [isrohams]"
<isrohams@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxxx "'Mani [VU2WMY/KJ6LRS]'
wmy@xxxx.xxx.xxx@xxxx.xxx.xxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] [isrohams] Re: [amsatindia] New Year Greetings
Message-ID: <20160102050343.5DE5E80E5@xxxxxxxxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; DelSp=Yes
Dear All,
?????????????? Thank You very Much for the New Year Wishes. I
wish you and your family a very very Happy, Prosperous , Healthy and
Fulfilling New Year 2016.
Regards
Raghavendra.M.R.
VU3GTI
Quoting "'V.MURALI KRISHNA' vmk@xxxx.xxx.xx [isrohams]"
<isrohams@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>:
> ?
> ?
>
> Dear All,
> Thanks for the wishes.
> I also Wish you all a very happy and prosperous new year.
>
> With Warm Regards
> V.Murali Krishna.
>
> Quoting "Balaji VU3PZA kbala@xxxx.xxx.xx [isrohams]"
> <isrohams@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>:
>
>> ?
>>
>> ?
>>
>> OM!
>> Wish you very happy and prosperous new year 2016.
>> with regards
>> Balaji (vu3pza)
>> 73 de
>> Balaji (VU3PZA)
>> Managing Committee Member
>> Upargrah Amateur Radio Club(VU2URC)
>> ISRO Satellite Centre, HAL Airport Road
>> Bangalore - 560 017, India.
>> Phone:(O)91-80-2508 2404, (R)91-80-2522 0810
>> ? ? ? (M)91-94807 05796 (6pm-8am)
>> Fax:? ? ?91-80-2508 2406
>> E-mail ID: vu3pza@xxxxx.xxxx kbala@xxxx.xxx.xx
>>
>> ?
>>
>> -------------------------
>>
>> Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any
>> attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may
>> contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized
>> review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not
>> the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and
>> destroy all copies of the original message.
>>
>> -------------------------
>>
>> ?
>
>
> ?
> V MURALI KRISHNA
> SCI/ENGR-SE;PFF/IFF/MFF
> ISRO SATELLITE CENTRE
> HAL AIRPORT ROAD
> BANGALORE - 560 017.
> INDIA.
> EMAIL: vmk@xxxx.xxx.xx
> Phone:
> ? ? ? Office:? ? ? ? +91-80-25083023
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?+91-80-25083028
>
> ?
>
> -------------------------
>
> Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any
> attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may
> contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized
> review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not
> the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and
> destroy all copies of the original message.
>
> -------------------------
>
> __._,_.___
> ?
>
> -------------------------
> Posted by: "V.MURALI KRISHNA" <vmk@xxxx.xxx.xx>
> -------------------------
>
> ?
>
>
> Reply via web post[1] ? Reply to sender [2]
?
> Reply to group [3] ? Start a New Topic[4]
> ? Messages in this topic[5] (2)
>
> ONE WORLD ONE LANGUAGE - ISRO HAMS
> ----------------------------------
> To subscribe for this group, send an email to
> isrohams-subscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx
> Visit Your Group[6]
>
>
> [7] ? Privacy[8] ? Unsubscribe[9] ? Terms of Use[10]
>
> ?
>
> .
>
> __,_._,___
Links:
------
[1]
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/isrohams/conversations/messages/1769;_ylc=
X3oDMTJxMThzZWdvBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzE3NzgyNDU5BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwODM5NjM3OQ
Rtc2dJZAMxNzY5BHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA3JwbHkEc3RpbWUDMTQ1MTY0MDMxOQ--?act=reply&messa
geNum=1769
[2]
mailto:vmk@xxxx.xxx.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[3]
mailto:isrohams@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[4]
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/isrohams/conversations/newtopic;_ylc=X3oDM
TJmNTBsMjE4BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzE3NzgyNDU5BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwODM5NjM3OQRzZWM
DZnRyBHNsawNudHBjBHN0aW1lAzE0NTE2NDAzMTk-
[5]
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/isrohams/conversations/topics/1768;_ylc=X3
oDMTM1ODVrbHM5BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzE3NzgyNDU5BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwODM5NjM3OQRt
c2dJZAMxNzY5BHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA3Z0cGMEc3RpbWUDMTQ1MTY0MDMxOQR0cGNJZAMxNzY4
[6]
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/isrohams/info;_ylc=X3oDMTJmODVlNnRnBF9TAzk
3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzE3NzgyNDU5BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwODM5NjM3OQRzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2Z2hwB
HN0aW1lAzE0NTE2NDAzMTk-
[7]
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJldWpocjhvBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzE3
NzgyNDU5BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwODM5NjM3OQRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNnZnAEc3RpbWUDMTQ1MTY0MDMxOQ
--
[8] https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html
[9] mailto:isrohams-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[10] https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for
the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and
privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or
distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please
contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original
message.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 2016 11:46:29 +0100
From: Francesco Messineo <francesco.messineo@xxxxx.xxx>
To: Wouter Weggelaar <wouterweg@xxxxx.xxx>
Cc: amsat bb <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Waiting for Solar Panel Efficiency (Ha!)
rebuttal
Message-ID:
<CAESs-_ww2gEYtEmGwqSGoUS1C8n8QhcV_E4Pz_jE8QBDmW6d1w@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
On Fri, Jan 1, 2016 at 11:59 PM, Wouter Weggelaar <wouterweg@xxxxx.xxx> wrote:
>
> 5) There is no reason in The Netherlands to not have extra renewable energy
> sources. I really don't know how your "fossil fuel industry's opposition"
> can keep you from putting solar panels on your roof. I think everyone
> should!
>
Here in Italy we have a good amount of sunshine, yet the power
companies (and local laws) do what they can to discourage renewable
energy (it's not as convenient as it should be yet).
> A - they sensed each other as valid grid voltage, leaving an engineer
> unable to cut the power on a section of line. There was no way to shut
> these suckers off in case you need to work at the substation safely
grids still are too "old" in this respect, they expect to have a "one
way" direction for power flow, which is obviously not the case since
some years now. To safely work on a piece of grid, it must be "cut" in
more than one part.
> B - the grid frequency (50Hz here) would run away upwards until there were
> MOSFets flying everywhere. We literally had a dozen kill themselves when we
> did that experiment. It was huge fun though, hearing them scream ;)
all line inverters that I know have safe limits for grid frequency,
and after frequency crosses one of those limits, they just shut down
the power.
> Lastly, unfortunately my country is still pathetic in using solar power. we
> should really be doing more here and world-wide. Yes, we peaked at 100%,
> for a very short time though ;)
>
one good thing that european laws must do is to force all nations to
make all is worth to permit more renewable energy generation. I think
this isn't going to happen, at least soon, in my opinion.
73
Frank IZ8DWF
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 2016 14:57:18 +0100
From: Andre <sats@xxxxxx.xxxxx.xx>
To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Waiting for Solar Panel Efficiency (Ha!)
rebuttal
Message-ID: <5687D73E.8090204@xxxxxx.xxxxx.xx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
>
> Lastly, unfortunately my country is still pathetic in using solar power. we
> should really be doing more here and world-wide. Yes, we peaked at 100%,
> for a very short time though ;)
>
Don't forget that that 100% was when Germany was dumping their excess
solar and wind power on the Dutch grid for free, if the Germans had not
done their their own grid would have collapsed.
73 de Andre PE1RDW
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 2016 09:17:47 -0600
From: "Glenn Anderson" <wb5tuf@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
To: "'Robert Bruninga'" <bruninga@xxxx.xxx>, "'amsat bb'"
<amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Waiting for Solar Panel Efficiency (Ha!)
rebuttal
Message-ID: <009001d14570$bcbc5d50$363517f0$@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
You're paying 14 cents per KWh.....Holy crap!!!!
My current provider is charging me 2.6 cents per KWh if I stay under 2000KWh
per month and 4.5 cents if I go over.
Glenn WB5TUF
And if you still don't believe it, just witness our local BG&E. When you
get a regular smart meter, they automatically will PAY EVERY consumer on
their system TEN TIMES the normal rate for every kWh they do NOT use during
these peak summer days! Normally our rate is 14 cents per kwH. But during
peak summer loads, they will pay $1.50 per kWh that you do NOT use. There
is the proof as to how much electricity really costs when it is needed
most... yet they get my solar (net metered) for just the same 14 cents and
are very definitely enjoying it.
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 2016 11:44:59 -0500
From: Robert Bruninga <bruninga@xxxx.xxx>
To: amsat bb <amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Waiting for Solar Panel Efficiency (Ha!) Grid
stability
Message-ID:
<CALdCfNLHC0ok6v0EgPi9ptwZb4x6x018RzsGDFoCGqSV2JST9A@xxxx.xxxxx.xxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Concerning our solar powered satellite ground stations:...
> 6) [concerning]... grid stability. ..
> The cheap models I tested had two very dangerous features:
> A - they sensed each other as valid grid voltage,...
> leaving an engineer unable to cut the power...
> B - the grid frequency...would run away upwards
Which is why all grid-tie inverters must be compliant with grid standards.
Which is also why the local establishment requires permits and inspections
and UL certification of all solar grid tie installations and which is also
why ALL grid-tied inverters are required by the NEC and inspected to make
sure they comply with all relevant standards.
1) They shut down within one half cycle on loss of grid power
2) They shut down on over voltage
3) They shut down on frequency out of tolerance usually anything more than
0.5Hz away from 60 Hz
4) They willl not come back on line until after monitoring the grid for 5
minutes to make sure it is safe and within operating limts.
And lastly grid-tie inverters are not like a normal "inverter" at all.
They are simply AC current sources that sense the existing 60.0 Hz grid and
push current to lead the waveform and thus source power to the grid. Lose
the waveform or any other condition, and it just stops.
[What about power when the grid is down?]
> 7) Our national grid has had 99.9999% uptime... with only 4 interruptions
in 2014.
Similar here. Typically we lose power about 4 hours a year which is
about 99.96% uptime. And a simple deep cycle marine battery powers my
home's critical circuits then. Or I plug into the Hybrid car.
Bob
> On Fri, Jan 1, 2016 at 10:14 PM, Robert Bruninga <bruninga@xxxx.xxx>
> wrote:
>
>> > from a technical point of view there is a huge reason
>> > to hold off on all these extra feed-ins (net-metering).
>> > And that simple reason is grid stability.
>>
>> True and false....
>>
>> It is true that the grid of 1970 has to evolve to avoid problems with grid
>> stability. But they have been aware of these problems and have been
>> evolving for the last 40 years to get away from the catastrophic results
>> of
>> business as usual and resulting half-country blackouts.
>>
>> Although the utilities are glacially slow to adapt, the growth of solar
>> and
>> wind has also been glacially slow because people just resist change even
>> when it is to their advantage. But the GRID has seen it coming and has
>> been getting ready.
>>
>> 10 years ago, they said the grid will go unstable above 2% solar (because
>> they NEVER even looked at the weather to estimate tomorrow's load). Now
>> the weather model is an excellent forcaster of available power an dload.
>> Then 5 years ago they were saying the grid would go unstable at 10%.
>> (Absolutely true if they still did nothing to improve their systems from
>> the 1970s way of dispatching power But they have not been sitting still).
>>
>> Guess what, Hawaii has now passed 40% solar and the grid has still not
>> gone
>> unstable because every day they are improving how they manage the grid.
>> Back in 2013, Germany exceeded 60% solar and wind and their grid held up
>> fine. Then this year, the Netherlands peaked at 100% solar/wind and their
>> grid did just fine. The US can easily keep up with the evolving grid as
>> long as we dont get held back by the fossil fuel industry's opposition.
>>
>> So of course, the stability of the grid is a concern, but that is why we
>> have some of the best EE's on the planet working in parallel for 3 decades
>> with renwewable growth to stay ahead of the variability of renewable clean
>> power.
>>
>> So I don't fault anyone for commenting on the stability of the grid, but
>> it
>> is always last year's news and not keeping up with the day to day march
>> toward cleaner power.
>>
>> I attended an IEEE International Conference on Energy last year and
>> expected to hear gloom and doom. I heard exactlly the opposite. Every
>> paper showing techinques, and how to achieve stability and renewable
>> growth were ten times as many as the few claiming doom. And most papers
>> were showing how easy it was with positiv results and others how we will
>> be
>> able to grow the changes to make the grid more responsive.
>>
>> So keep a jaundiced ear to repetitions of decades or even last year's dire
>> predictions... the world is changing despite the billions of dollars being
>> spent by the fossil fuel industry to make sure they remain on top.
>>
>> Bob, Wb4APR
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > So regardless of any tariff schemes and/or the power companies trying to
>> > keep their market, there is a substantial technical hurdle. I don't know
>> > how it is in the US, but I did some research during an internship on
>> this
>> > in The Netherlands, and as a result, some kinds of inverters were
>> outlawed
>> > in the EU because they were really dangerous to the grid stability, and
>> > also not safe in the end when instabilities did occur.
>> > (and not all of those were made in china....)
>> > Are they discouraging a growth beyond a certain size just to prevent
>> this
>> > issue?
>> >
>> > Maybe this is substantially different in the US, since the grid looks
>> > completely different.
>> >
>> >
>> > Wouter PA3WEG
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Fri, Jan 1, 2016 at 5:36 PM, Burns Fisher <burns@xxxxxx.xx> wrote:
>> >
>> >> I guess there are a lot of folks interested in this even though it is
>> only
>> >> peripherally related to satellites...I hope there are not too many
>> >> objections.
>> >>
>> >> But I wanted to ask if anyone has heard this rumor: After a certain
>> >> number
>> >> of solar connections, power companies will no longer be required to do
>> net
>> >> metering. I don't know whether a) they would just not allow any more
>> new
>> >> installations with backfeed at all or b) for new installations they
>> would
>> >> only pay wholesale, or c) somehow they average retail and wholesale
>> prices
>> >> for everyone who is backfeeding.
>> >>
>> >> I can surely understand why a power company would WANT to do that.
>> They
>> >> are usually getting power that they have to pay extra for at a time
>> when
>> >> they need it less. But it certainly reduces some of the financial
>> >> incentive to install, if true. Anyone know more? It would probably
>> >> differ
>> >> by state...
>> >>
>> >> 73,
>> >>
>> >> Burns W2BFJ
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, Jan 1, 2016 at 11:21 AM, Robert Bruninga <bruninga@xxxx.xxx>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > > If the project is not operating by now, it'll cost 30% more after
>> >> > midnight.
>> >> >
>> >> > No. The 30% federal tax incentive was to end by the end of 2016, not
>> the
>> >> > beginning. AND does'nt matter anyway, since the do-nothing congress
>> >> > actually included an extenaion in the spending bill.
>> >> >
>> >> > > Putting solar on an asphalt roof ... is a bad idea. Not a place to
>> >> screw
>> >> > up.
>> >> >
>> >> > Use a reputable contractor with guarantee. They know how to do it
>> >> right.
>> >> >
>> >> > > 42 panels 50 lbs per (for 11 kW system)...
>> >> > > Remember statics and dynamics??
>> >> > > ... bracing rafters in a crawlspace is a mug's game.
>> >> > > In Florida in summer? Fatal.
>> >> >
>> >> > 50 lbs per panel over 18 sqft is only a load of 2.8 lbs per square
>> foot
>> >> > and is insignificant compared to the required building code roof
>> design
>> >> > figure of typically 30 psf. (Though in Florida the snow load is
>> >> considered
>> >> > 0). The good news elsewhere is that solar panels melt snow far
>> faster
>> >> than
>> >> > a normal roof, so there is no multiday buildup and icing load...
>> >> >
>> >> > > Today as of 3pm EDT the system produced 23 kWh.
>> >> > > Best day so far was 100% FL sunshine and a COLD day: 82 kWh.
>> >> >
>> >> > Congratulations, sounds like you did it anyway...
>> >> >
>> >> > > HF RFI? Undetectable.
>> >> >
>> >> > Thanks, that is great news!
>> >> >
>> >> > > I got the last (3) 3.8kW transformer based inverters in stock.
>> >> > > SMA makes nice gear. Cadwelds, IMC 3/4" conduit.
>> >> >
>> >> > I was totally shocked when I ordered an SMA inverter to add to my
>> other
>> >> > three XANTREX ones which only weighted 25 lbs. The SMA was so heavy
>> I
>> >> had
>> >> > to invite my son to dinner just to get help getting it from the
>> porch to
>> >> > inside the house! Then had to feed him again a week later to help
>> lift
>> >> it
>> >> > into place. I think it is over 100 lbs? And compared to the XANTREX,
>> >> there
>> >> > were may nitpicks I did not like about the SMA at all.
>> >> >
>> >> > But then of course, XANTREX doesn't make grid-tie inverters any more
>> and
>> >> > SMA does seem to have very good reviews.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 12:25 PM, Bob <WB4SON@xxxxx.xxx> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > > > Sort of off the AMSAT topic, but the most recent estimate is that
>> >> about
>> >> > > 20
>> >> > > > gigawatts of solar will be added in 2016 -- almost doubling the
>> >> total
>> >> > > > installed capacity of US solar power. This is being primarily
>> >> driven
>> >> > by
>> >> > > > residential installations. Utility-scale installations are
>> actually
>> >> > down
>> >> > > > 5%.
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > One thing that was keeping mass market efficiency down was a
>> glut of
>> >> > > > production capability that existed through 2014. Manufactures
>> were
>> >> not
>> >> > > > keen on investing in new processes at the same time they were
>> going
>> >> out
>> >> > > of
>> >> > > > business or consolidating. That glut has been drying up,
>> prompting
>> >> > Elon
>> >> > > > Musk's to build a $1 billion dollar factory in Buffalo NY which
>> will
>> >> > > > produce 1 GW of panels annually by the end of 2016. Those panels
>> >> are
>> >> > > > expected to be 22.1% efficient. That's a pretty impressive gain
>> in
>> >> > > > efficiency.
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > Often times market conditions, not technology, dictates what
>> reaches
>> >> > the
>> >> > > > mass market, and that has most certainly been the case in the
>> solar
>> >> > > > industry. That 50% increase in panel efficiency doesn't
>> necessarily
>> >> > mean
>> >> > > > that the cost per watt will be reduced in the short term -- those
>> >> > panels
>> >> > > > may simply sell for 50% more.
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > 73, Bob, WB4SON
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 6:07 AM, Nick Pugh wrote:
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > >> Good point Bob but include the real estate cost in to the
>> equation
>> >> > and
>> >> > > >> they improve.
>> >> > > >> nick
>> >> > > >>
>> >> > > >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> > > >> From: AMSAT-BB [On Behalf Of Robert Bruninga
>> >> > > >> Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2015 11:06 AM
>> >> > > >> To: amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx
>> >> > > >> Subject: [amsat-bb] Waiting for Solar Panel Efficiency (Ha!)
>> >> > > >>
>> >> > > >> Compare the cost and efficiency of solar panels for cubesats and
>> >> for
>> >> > > your
>> >> > > >> house:
>> >> > > >>
>> >> > > >> http://aprs.org/Energy/solar/efficiency-comparison-cost.png
>> >> > > >>
>> >> > >
>> >> > _______________________________________________
>> >> > Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum
>> available
>> >> > to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership.
>> >> Opinions
>> >> > expressed
>> >> > are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official
>> views of
>> >> > AMSAT-NA.
>> >> > Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
>> >> program!
>> >> > Subscription settings:
>> http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>> >> >
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
>> >> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership.
>> >> Opinions expressed
>> >> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views
>> of
>> >> AMSAT-NA.
>> >> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
>> program!
>> >> Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sent via AMSAT-BB@xxxxx.xxx. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
>> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership.
>> Opinions expressed
>> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
>> AMSAT-NA.
>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
>> Subscription settings: http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>>
>
>
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
Sent via amsat-bb@xxxxx.xxx.
AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available to all interested persons worldwide
without requiring membership. Opinions expressed
are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
AMSAT-NA.
Not an AMSAT member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
http://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
------------------------------
End of AMSAT-BB Digest, Vol 11, Issue 3
***************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
