Quote:
ems, I just read all 12 pages of your topic in one sitting.
Thanks Doug, I'm honored. I have received a lot of valuable input so far and appreciate you chiming in.
Quote:
The advice about ferrocement is largely from warm climate people. There are many cold climate concerns.
I've been thinking about that. People pour concrete here but it is not hugely popular. I'm not sure if I want to live in this house forever and if I go to sell, I want the greenhouse to be optional -- so it must be somewhat portable.
I have decided to go with a treated wood tank. I've been thinking about it for a week. It will basically be a reinforced plywood box with a liner. I downloaded some handy load tables for lumber and plywood -- designed for concrete forming. In order to be most space efficient and safe for my kids, I'm going to put a plywood floor over the tank with an access hatch. In order to use the space above the tank, I decided to raise the walls 2' inside. Luckily I only had one wall built so I can get by with some minor modifications and then build the other wall the way I want it.
Quote:
What are you going to do during the dark months? How much lighting wattage do you need? What kind of lighting are you planning?
Lighting is contingent upon how much money I make this summer (and how much progress I make on the greenhouse). My preferece is metal Halide lights -- much more lumens per fixture. I have done quite a bit of research on lighting over the years. I may use some sodiums and a few fluorescents appropriately, but my preference is MH. Many people are hysterical about flourescent lights, but actually T5HOs aren't significantly more efficient than T8's (in terms of lumens per watt) T5's are more efficient but not as compact. And all bulbs are rated based on their median light output. Fluorescents degrade more slowly over time than MH so that makes the MH look less efficient. (I'm trying to be brief) However, since I can get 400W or 1000W MH light bulbs fairly inexpensively, it seems like scheduled bulb changes could keep efficiency higher (and take a lot less time than changing Fluorescents).
Anyway, I calculated that I'd need about 45kw worth of lights (yes, 45 1000W lights to grow the whole area) Obviously I won't have plants in the aisles and I can run the lights for 20 hours or more so I can probably get away with 20kw. I've been looking at a 25kw natural gas generator and thinking that might come in handy -- internal combustion engines being only about 30% efficient -- if I can capture 50% of the waste heat, I'll be putting 66,000 Btu into the water. The lights will put off that much heat so with thermal storage and bubble insulation, I might not need to do any supplimental heating. Hopefully this doesn't offend any rabid environmentalists on the board. My rationalle is that I'm footing the bill for a proof of concept greenhouse that could potentially grow food year-round in the Arctic. And I haven't done the math, but I'm pretty sure the energy I'll use to produce vegetables in the winter will be less than it takes to grow them in Florida or California and then truck, ship, or airlift them in heated or refrigerated containers to Alaska. But if I'm wrong and I actually waste energy with my greenhouse, I'm having fun and not burning up gasoline in a snowmachine or 4-wheeler and poluting the pristine wilderness with beer cans (like the typical Alaskan) And I'm with my wife and kids -- and probably friends. Most likely I'll have a lot of company this winter -- Alaskans get very very tired of white and very hungry for green. I might have to charge admission.....
On patents <snip>
Quote:
It does bother me when anyone says ideas should be free and I have no exclusive right to produce what I invent.
I never said that. What I meant to say was that patents are not guaranteed protection.
Quote:
The idea of sacrificing the few for the benefit of the many is enslavement of the few.
I agree. Socialism is good about the sacrificing part and not so good about "benefit of the many" part. And that goes for the United States, Canada, UK, Australia -- and any other democratic country that embraces socialistic thinking (ie. Big Government)
Quote:
I can not leave the 'patents have been misused' statement go unchallenged. Patents keep people from stealing ideas like other laws keep people from stealing bricks.
I agree with your analagy. Patents keep people from stealing ideas about as much as laws keep people from stealing bricks -- or speeding -- or cheating on their taxes -- or "cooking the books" like Enron.
Quote:
The ideas are much more valuable and important. Artists need the same protection. Creations are valuable and need protecting, even more than bricks and other tangibles.
I couldn't agree more. I forget what I said or the conversation that surrounded it, but I was trying to communicate the fact that getting a patent is not necessarily the easy way to riches. In order to make money, you have to have a way to profit from the idea -- ie. produce it yourself or sell it to someone who can -- and you may need the resources to protect yourself from someone who tries to steal the idea or cheat you out of royalties....
All that to say that I agree with what you said and I must have miscommunicated my intent originally.
On the topic of law, a friend of mine (who happens to be an engineer) said he thinks there should be more engineers and less lawyers in government. Lawyers think that the right combination of words will solve any problem. Engineers think more of action.