Windsun wrote: »
Rick apparently felt that they should have a chance to reply to the opinions. That does not mean they are allowed to do any advertising - the same rules on advertising and links still apply. On the other hand, I agree with Rick that they should have a chance to reply.
dwh wrote: »
"D-" BBB rating? Holy cow! Would it be "slanderous" for me to say that that rating just plain sucks?
fligurl's tiimely appearance and (first) post seems just a *bit* too convenient. I'm suspecting either a plant or a sock puppet.
1.9 These requirements do not cover explosion-proof, dust-ignition-proof, or intrinsically-safe methods of protection for electrical equipment or parts thereof. Such methods of protection are considered acceptable for Division 2 hazardous locations. The requirements are covered in other standards.
1.10 A product that contains features, characteristics, components, materials, or systems new or different from those covered by the requirements in this standard, and that involves a risk of fire or of electric shock or injury to persons shall be evaluated using appropriate additional component and end-product requirements to maintain the level of safety as originally anticipated by the intent of this standard. A product whose features, characteristics, components, materials, or systems conflict with specific requirements or provisions of this standard does not comply with this standard. Revision of requirements shall be proposed and adopted in conformance with the methods employed for development, revision, and implementation of this standard.
sfseng wrote: »
People here seem to be ignoring the fact that the claims about running refrigerators etc. come directly from the Xantrex advert. copy. So I guess Xantrex is lying and misleading their customers. If we are not reputable businesses for making those claims then Xantrex is not a reputable company either.
Tony wrote: »
... I am also looking at solar, probably for the same reasons. I am also tech/elec challenged and am gathering infor SLOWLY!!
I live in an apartment without a great deal of direct sunlight. I want to be able to run a PC, a few lights, a refrigerator and, and, if possible, short bursts from a microwave, possibly for a long term outage.
The Xantrex 1500 suggests that a 40 W BP solar panel will do this, and more. It is pricey ($750 package), but portable (on wheels) and plug 'n play.
1) Is this likely to be accurate?
2) Is there a better (cost, efficiency, smaller, etc.) way to go?
3) Is Xantrex acceptable?
4) Will 80 W be better -(Duh!) The 40w plug 'n play package is appealing.
Jim wrote: »
The Xantrex 1500 Powerpack contains a 60 Ah AGM battery. Assuming that the battery is healthy and fully charged, that the ambient temperature is ~77 F, that discharge current from the battery is 3 A (C/20), a severe 80% discharge (48 Ah) and 90% inverter efficiency, it can supply 32 W at 120 VAC for ~16 hours, or ~518 Whr of energy.
Heavier loads will reduce the battery’s useable capacity. Using my desktop PC (Dell 3000 w/ LCD monitor) as an example, it draws 130 W from a true sine wave inverter. Let’s make that 150 W from the Powerpack’s MSW inverter, and factoring in the inverter’s 90% efficiency estimate, that would be 167 W from the 12 V battery, or ~14 A. A healthy and fully charged 60 Ah AGM battery will sustain a 14 A load for ~3 hours before hitting a 20% SOC (80 % DOD).
This type of discharge is severe and should not be done very often. A 50% max DOD is a good rule of thumb.
So, I think the Powerpack could run a typical modern PC only for about three hours as a backup power source. You can run similar calculations for other small loads, but the battery in the Powerpack could not possibly sustain a typical fridge compressor’s start-up surge.
Assuming a 40 W PV module, a small controller (i.e., a Morningstar SunSaver) and the equivalent of 5 hours per day of insolation, it would take ~4-5 days to recharge the Powerpack’s battery from an 80% discharge.
BB. wrote: »
First, think about how long and what loads...
PC on Internet--probably won't be any cable modems working more than a few hours after a major power failure... You may or may not have telephone/local ISP access... A laptop is a good choice--much less power than a desktop.
Fridge--without lots of sun and panels, you are not going to be able to power it... Microwave, not without a couple good size batteries...
wayne wrote: »
It's very unfortunate that some suppliers are spreading wrong information like this. People believe it, purchase it and when it won't do as advertised, come to the conclusion that Solar won't work / is no good. I've talked, or should I say listened to people who have swallowed the line, bought similar systems, believing that it would run their full sized fridge for the next six weeks and are astonished when it will only do so for six minutes. If indeed it will even start the fridge, which by the way, tends to be one of the biggest energy pigs in the house.
Check out the thread on "Chest Fridges.
niel wrote: »
i think i'd have maybe 300-400w for an inverter at the most for the system i just reiterated, but i suppose 600w would work for shorter run times (like under 1 hour). 1800w is too high for the rest of the system no matter what.
sfseng wrote: »
... You guys on this sight [sic] are smart enough to design a system that is this size and meets the portability requirements of our customers. ...
sfseng wrote: »
Kamala - If I was as mean spirited as some of those who criticized our system as an "abortion"
sfseng wrote: »
... Kamala - If I was as mean spirited as some of those who criticized our system as an "abortion" I could go crazy demeaning a system that was described as an inverter "duct taped" to a battery. ...