Power Supplies, Energy Efficiency, Generators

Converting Waste Heat to Electricity

2012-01-24T15:40:00.003-05:00

A company called Nextreme Thermal Solutions, based in Durham, N.C developed a thermoelectric generator (eTEG) that converts heat directly to low-level electrical power. Their technology uses the Seebeck Effect in which the temperature difference between two metals creates an electrical potential difference. Their generator uses Linear Technology LTC 3108 ultralow voltage step-up converter and power manager chip and can produce voltages up to 5V at power level up to 1 mW on a temperature difference of 15 to 20°K (the temperature difference in Kelvin is the same as in Celsius). Higher temperature gradients will result in higher power. Such devices can be used to feed micropower wireless and battery-free sensors. Unfortunately, the eTEG power levels are not sufficient to increase efficiency of power supplies by recycling heat energy from heatsinks. Also unfortunately, the prices starting at about $500 make this technology cost-prohibitive for regular consumers and hobbyists. By the way, the thermoelectric effect has been known for almost two centuries since Thomas Johann Seebeck discovered that electrical current flows between two dissimilar metals which have different temperatures.

Energy Efficient TV with 0 Watt Standby Mode

2011-12-13T13:41:00.004-05:00

Toshiba Corp is reportedly releasing a 32 inch (visual size) LCD TV model "Regza 32BE3" equipped with its so-called "Eco Chip." The Eco Chip consumption current is said to be as low as about 95μA. This chip is used to detect ON signals from the remote control after the TV is turned off. It cuts off the AC power entirely through a relay as if you an unplugged TV. As the result, the power consumption in standby mode is 0 watt. The relay and the sensor that receive signals from the remote are powered by a large storage capacitor. Unfortunately, the report does not state the size of this capacitor and what happens when you leave the TV off for a long time. I guess either the chip needs to turn on the relay and re-activate standby bias supply before the cap is discharged too low, or you would need to turn on the TV by hand if the cap is discharged. Also they did not state power consumtpion or internal power supply efficiency in active mode (I wonder if they use bridgeless PFC front end?) In any case, such a "zero power standby" circuit is cute, but it is nothing more than a marketing gimmick. Obviously, you need to charge the storage cap during on-mode of the TV set. Whatever energy you save in 0W standby mode you need to spend to put this energy into this cap.

More Troubles with Energy Efficient Bulbs

2011-09-02T16:43:00.002-04:00

U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission just announced a voluntary recall of LED night lights imported from China by Corvest Acquisition Inc. It was reported these LED lights can overheat, smolder, and melt which may cause burns to consumers. The affected part has model number SBD01 stamped on the back of the plastic base.

Portable Generator: How to Use it Safely

2011-08-26T14:32:00.012-04:00

If you just bought a portable generator set (genset) in wake of approaching Irene hurricane, and don't have time to read the entire manual, here are some crucial things you need to know. This quick safety checklist can save your life and lives of everyone in your home.

Portable generators produce carbon monoxide (CO). CO can kill in minutes. More than three hundreds people died in US during power outages from generator related CO poisonings. Therefore a portable generator can be run only outdoor with exhaust away from your home. EPA recommends to locate gensets at least 10 feet from the home You should also allow at least 2 feet of clearance on all sides of generator for adequate ventilation.

Most commercial portables are not weather proof. They pose the risk of electrocution and shock when used during a rain. Therefore, cover your genset in advance since Irene hurricane will be accompanied with heavy rain. It is not recommended to run a genset during a rain. If you are absolutely positively need to use a portable generator during a rain, build an open canopy-like structure. Don’t’ touch a genset with wet hands.

A portable generator should not be connected directly into your house wiring without a special two pole disconnect switch, since otherwise you will be feeding electricity back into the utility lines. This would present a hazard for utility workers and your neighbors. Portables are intended to be connected to your appliances primarily via extension cords. If you did not get a chance to install a transfer switch, prepare heave duty outdoor-rated cords with sufficient length. These cords should be long enough to reach your appliances through the windows or open doors.

This is not a professional or a legal advice- I assume no liability of any kind for the accuracy of the above information.

New Auto Gas Mileage Standards

2011-08-01T12:24:00.002-04:00

President Obama recently unveiled a plan to sharply increase auto fuel economy. The proposal would require the companies to reach average fuel efficiency across their U.S. fleets of 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025. The good news this would lower US oil use by 2.2 million barrels a day over the next 15 years, and accordingly cut the amount of money flowing to OPEC. It would also cut more than 6 billion tons of carbon emissions during this period of time. The bad news is according to The Center for Automotive Research, this requirement cost about $6,700 extra per car. It is also absolutely obvious that in order to achieve such fuel efficiency, the automakers would have to make the cars much lighter. Lighter cars of course are less safe. In a head-on collision, a lighter car will always have larger change in velocity due to Conservation of Momentum law (see Hyperphysics Concepts). So, no matter what anyone tells you, new fuel economy standards will hurt vehicles safety simply due to the laws of physics, even though the new cars may meet National standards for car crash safety. The trick is, during the compliance tests the car is being crashed against a still wall. Properly designed lightweight cars can perfectly pass these tests and claim five-star safety rating. However, they will have an obvious disadvantage in real conditions if collided with heavier cars. If more fuel-efficient cars offer us, the consumers, a true advantage, why mandate it? Should not their production and sales be driven by the market forces?

Energy Savings Bulbs Fire Hazard

2011-05-11T12:22:00.000-04:00

I wrote previously about potential mercury poisoning and UV radiation hazards related compact fluorescent lamp (CFL). Now it appears they may also present a fire hazard. The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission just announced a voluntary recall of some energy-saving light bulbs made by Telstar Products (d/b/a Sprint International Inc) due to fire hazard. The affected bulbs are rated between 18 and 40 watt and are sold in discount stores under the brand names Telstar and Electra. Remember, unlike incandescent bulbs, a CFL is not just a filament. It contains a small PCB with electronic circuit that converts 115VAC 60 Hz input voltage into high frequency AC that drives the lamp. And any electronic circuit, especially the one that contains high voltage transistors and electrolytic capacitors, may be a potential fire hazard. This is another reason to stock up old incandescent bulbs that may not be available in US beginning 2012.

Recall of Sanus Surge Protectors Due to Shock Hazard

2011-04-14T13:25:00.004-04:00

Milestone AV Technologies LLC voluntary recalled all low-profile power conditioners (surge protectors) Sanus Elements model ELM205, which used to be sold by home theater dealers. It was reported that improper grounding of the case and inadequate insulation poses an electrical shock hazard to consumers. More info is available from U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission.

EPA To Spend $1.2M for "Environmental Justice"

2011-01-29T22:18:00.004-05:00

EPA just announced it seeks applicants for $1.2 Million in so-called Environmental Justice Grants. EPA website says that "Environmental justice means the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people, regardless of race or income, in the environmental decision-making process." Hmm. Don't we have democracy and equality? Is anyone in US deprived from the rights to take part in "decision-making process"?
EPA also states "Environmental contamination can lead to costly health risks and can discourage investments and development in low-income, minority, and indigenous communities disproportionately impacted by pollution". From what I read about it, previous studies by Centers for Disease Control shows no evidence that racial minorities experience higher exposure to environmental chemicals than whites on a national scale (see for example aei.org ). As for low-income communities, it was suggested that poor neighborhoods often grew up around existing refineries and chemical plants because the land was cheap. Similarly, new facilities could be built near poor neighborhoods because land there is cheaper. How would these EPA grants change the law of supply and demand in real estate? Of course, 1.2M is a drop in the bucket relative to billions of taxpayers dollars spent by our government. But, there is no doubt, the government has many more spending programs like that.

CFL Bulbs: Potential Mercury Danger

2011-01-06T19:08:00.007-05:00

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently announced that they “improved” its guidance on how to clean up a broken compact fluorescent lamp (CFL). Included with the guidance is a new consumer brochure with CFL recycling and cleanup tips. Why is it you may ask, EPA pays attention on broken bulbs? They don’t tell you how to clean up a broken laptop or an ipod, do they? Well, as most of us know, CFLs contain mercury sealed within the glass tubing, an average of 5 milligrams. When a fluorescent lamp breaks, mercury vapor is released, which may pose health risks. EU’s Scientific Committee on Health and Environmental Risks asserted that when you are exposed to a broken bulb, there is a danger that “long-term toxicological limit values may be exceeded up to 6,000 times”. All this raises a number of questions:
· Why is it instead of just banning CFLs, EPA explicitly encourages Americans to use them?
· How come we don’t read on the CFL label something like this: “This product contains substances known to the state of California as causing kidney and brain damage”?
· Is not ROHS directive bans products containing lead and mercury in amounts exceeding 0.1 % in homogeneous materials? After all, in electronic equipment these elements present health threat only if you have a habit of chewing printed circuit boards, but releasing mercury vapor in CFL by accidentally (or intentionally) breaking may be a real threat.

A simple answer is: a CFL is more energy efficient than incandescent bulbs, and therefore it must be a politically correct health hazard. Probably for the same reason RoHS Directive conveniently exempts CFL from their requirements and allows up to 5 mg of mercury per lamp. And to add insult to the injury, the US government is phasing in between 2012 and 2014 new efficiency standards for lighting, which would preclude sale of most traditional incandescent bulbs (see Energy Independence And Security Act Of 2007 ). So, soon, we may not have a choice. European Union and Australia have already started to phase incandescents out in 2009. I guess, I am going to stock up on incandescents until we’ll be able to buy screw-in LED lamps at a reasonable cost. Of course, their "reasonable cost" will still be 10-20 times more than that of today's regular bulbs. Indeed, aside from high-intensity LEDs, they will have to include a small power circuit with power factor correction (PFC), but… we should not worry about it—the government knows what’s better for us.

Electricity Rates May Go Up Soon Due to New EPA Regulations

2010-12-26T14:29:00.006-05:00

Last week, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued its plan for establishing new greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution standards. EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson said: “We are following through on our commitment to proceed in a measured and careful way to reduce GHG pollution that threatens the health and welfare of Americans, and contributes to climate change.”

Here is a little history. Last summer, the US House of Representatives narrowly passed the 1,000+ page American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009, called the Cap-and-Trade bill. This bill particularly mandates a 17% cut in greenhouse gas emissions by 2020, puts a price on carbon dioxide emissions, requires that at least 20% of electricity comes from renewable sources, and mandates increased energy efficiency.

Basically, the government tried to "cap" the amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other so-called "greenhouse gases" that can be emitted nationally. Companies that emit such gases would be issued emission permits and would have to pay for these allowances every year. This of course would cause energy prices to rise, since the utilities and other companies would have to pay for emission permits and at the same time spend large amounts of money to change their technology. Does anyone have any doubts these extra costs will be passed on to the consumers? Luckily for us, the consumers, the Cap-and-Trade bill stalled in Senate. So now, having failed to impose their plan via Congress, the administration is moving unilaterally to develop new standards over the next year.
Note that CO2 is not declared a pollutant or health threat in itself, because it is not. Rather, its increase is said to have an insulating effect in the atmosphere and cause global warming. Most climate scientists support such a notion, although there are those who are skeptical about it. For example, Professor of Meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Richard S. Lindzen asserts in his article titled "Global Warming: The Origin and Nature of the Alleged Scientific Consensus", “there is no substantive basis for predictions of sizable global warming due to observed increases in minor greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide, methane, and chlorofluorocarbons”.

Of course, fossil fuels are finite. So, regardless of the scientific dispute on global warming, eventually we will have to switch entirely to renewable energy sources. However, the electricity production from renewable sources costs significantly more than that of coal and natural gas. For example, utility-scale solar electricity costs about four times more than coal-based electricity (see cost comparison of energy sources). To become cost-competitive, photovoltaic technology should become four times more efficient, which is theoretically impossible (see solar cell efficiency limits), or drop in price four-fold, which is unrealistic. Given this fact, the transition to alternative energy should be gradual and should not rapidly hit the economy and the consumers. Especially now, when the country is broke with a multi-trillion dollar debt, it’s not the right time to burden it with politically motivated regulations.

Recession, Jobs, and Business Ethics

2010-11-13T21:56:00.007-05:00

There used to be a saying: to launch a power supply company you need to have a two-car garage and one car. This is sort of how Todd Products, where I have worked for 11 years, was launched. Paul Todd himself was an engineer and an inventor. It was really nice to work for a company where a president could walk into your cubical and discuss the electronic circuits with you. As an engineer himself he understood that experienced engineers are holders of important expertise and are not commodity-- you get a drop in business, you lay them off; you get more business, you hire some more. Another example of engineer-entrepreneur for whom I had an opportunity to work is Richard Blake -- the founder of Transistors Devices. I feel it is always refreshing to work for a company whose owner could argue about the circuits and not just financial reports. In general, in the past, companies used to be owned by someone -- an entrepreneur, an inventor, an engineer, etc. -- who devoted his/her life to the company and cared about its long term growth. Now most of the companies are owned by shareholders, which means by everyone and by nobody. They are controlled by a board of directors who seem to care only about the bottom line, and who begin what they call “downsizing” as soon as they see a drop in business.

Last week’s issue of The Jewish Press featured an article, “The Media's Madoff Moment” by A.H. Foxman. It describes a story about a 1995 fire in a textile plant, Malden Mills, that employed 2,400 people. The fire destroyed three of the four factory buildings and caused $500 million in damage. Two days later Aaron Feuerstein, an Orthodox Jew who owned the company and who followed Biblical values in his business, announced that all his employees will be paid their full salaries. He also gave $80,000 in gifts to charitable organizations, as he did every holiday season. Feuerstein ended up paying full wages to his idle employees for up to four months while the plant was rebuilt. Whatever became nowadays of business owners with a human face? I was lucky to keep my job during the recession, but during the worst of it, unemployment rates of all engineers exceeded 5% and overall jobless rates were 10%. If the companies who have cash in a bank or enough assets to get loans tried to keep their employees in spite of the losses and let them do some R&D for example, they might wind up getting out of recession sooner and stronger. The people who keep getting their paychecks would keep buying things, which would stimulate the manufacturing and job growth better than unnatural injections in the form of the government’s “stimulus plans.” And the old employees who know your business would contribute more effectively than new ones who need to go through a learning curve.

Power Supply Efficiency and Power Factor: Regulations Update

2010-10-11T12:36:00.003-04:00

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has recently announced that effective December 31, 2010, external adapters will no longer be eligible for the Energy Star label. The main reason for this move is in 2008 a mandatory federal minimum efficiency standard went into effect for adapters, mandating basically the same Energy Star performance level.

Last month the ENERGY STAR also published its Draft 3 revision to the proposed criteria for LED lamps, which can be screw into standard lamp sockets to replace incandescent bulbs. To earn the ENERGY STAR logo the LED lamp should have power factor ≥ 0.70. Of course, Energy Star is a voluntary program. However, chances are their requirements will be eventually incorporated in a federal standard. Also, Europe already requires lighting PF>0.9. These developments will certainly cause LED lamps manufacturers to use active power factor correction (PFC) circuits for LED drive. Given the efficiency and size requirements, it's likely that the designers would also have to use other techniques such as bridgeless PFC rectifiers and synchronous rectification.

"True" Bridgeless PFC Claims Power Supply Efficiency Increase

2010-07-29T18:55:00.008-04:00

The July issue of Power Electronics Technology Magazine features an article by Dr.Slobodan Cuk entitled “The True Bridgeless PFC Converter Achieves Over 98% Efficiency, 0.999 Power Factor”. It describes the latest invention of Dr.Cuk aimed at eliminating input bridge rectifier from the offline PFC power supplies and thus increasing their efficiency and power factor.
The bridgeless PFC circuits were known before. The diagram below compares Dr.Cuk’s circuit with a different circuit described in ST’s App Note 1606.

The Dr.Cuk approach is certainly novel and very interesting just like probably all of his converter circuits. However, I believe the above article contains some advertising-style exaggerations.

For example, the author says: “This method also leads to a rather unusual converter topology consisting of three switches only: one controllable switch S and two passive current rectifier switches CR1 and CR2”. He also claims: “…The odd number of switches, three, is a distinctive characteristic of this converter with respect to all conventional switching converters…” However, later he admits: “…At present, a single MOSFET implementation is not possible due to built-in body-diode, so that switch S must be implemented by use of the two MOSFET devices connected in series at their sources and driven by a common floating gate drive circuit…” So, in reality, the switch S must consist of two switches and overall there are still four switches, not three. When the power switch S in ON, the current flows through three switches: S1, S2 and CR1, which is a drawback of this converter. With respect to the conduction losses during the ON time interval, I see no improvement relative to the known circuit of a “bridgeless PFC”, in which ON-state current flows through only two switches, S1 and S2. For the same reason I would say, it is not more "true" bridgeless than the other circuit. I understand, the reduction of conduction losses in Cuk's circuit comes during OFF state of the switch when the current flows through a single switch CR2 while in the known circuit it flows though two switches, such as CR1 and S2. Therefore the main advantage of this circuit would probably be realized when ON time is low and OFF time is high. Since at low input line the duty cycle and ON-time tend to be high, while at high line they tend to be low, the advantage of the Cuk’s proposed converter would be at high input lines where PFC has higher efficiency anyway. The article claims 98% efficiency, but unfortunately it does not state under which input and output conditions it was achieved. I tend to doubt very much it is achieved at low line.

Engineering Salaries 2010 Survey

2010-07-23T18:19:00.006-04:00

Design News magazine just revealed their 2010 Salary Survey of design engineers. The survey evaluated both compensation and job satisfaction.

According to the study, the average salary of a design engineer in 2010 was $89,597, average bonus: $9,025, average hours work per week: 46. 40% of engineers got base salary increased compared with 2009, 51% have the same salary (note that the study was done in April 2010, so some might still get a raise later on). 51% are Extremely or Very satisfied with their design engineering career.

41% said their company had layoffs/downsized during the last 6 months. Among all US regions, the largest amount of employed engineers was in Midwest (36%). The highest base salary is in Southwest ($106,756). The average compensation keep rising with an age being the highest for the age group of 55-64, and then declines ("Will you still need me, will you still feed me when I'm 64?"). The highest average compensation is in software area. The entire survey can be downloaded from the link in Design News magazine homepage (they require a registration, but for now it is free).

Consumer Products Safety: What's Unsafe

2010-06-10T19:11:00.003-04:00

The Commission of the European Union (EU) has recently released statistics on notices of unsafe consumer products that have been processed through their rapid information system (RAPEX). In April 2010 the Commission validated 145 notifications. Guess what tops the list of unsafe products? Cars? Nope, it’s toys for children. Of the 152 total notifications received, toys continue to top the list of unsafe products with 29% of the total notifications; clothing, textiles and fashion items - 19%, autos - 17%, electrical appliances -12%, cosmetics - 7%.

The notifications validated in April covered 11 different types of risk such as injuries (24%), chemical (18%), choking and strangulation (14% each), electric shock (10%).

Regarding the country of origin of the products identified as presenting a serious risk, more than half (53%) originated from China including Hong Kong. Another 19% of unsafe products originated in EU. For a comparison, only 2% came from US. Another good reason to buy American!

Energizer Duo USB Charger: Backdoor Trojan Issue

2010-03-25T12:27:00.007-04:00

Can a battery charger present a security risk to your computer? You bet, it can. Of course, not a charger itself, but a free software that comes with it. US-CERT (a United States Computer Emergency Readiness Team which is part of the Department of Homeland Security) has just issued a Vulnerability Note stating that "Energizer DUO USB battery charger software allows unauthorized remote system access".

For reference, Energizer Holdings, Inc. is one of the world's largest manufacturers of batteries, battery-powered devices and flashlights. Chances are your portable player uses their batteries. In 2007, Energizer introduced Duo USB Charger that can charge Nickel Metal Hydride batteries from a USB port. It had optional downloadable software that let you view the battery charging status. Well, it has been found that this software included a file Arucer.dll which is a backdoor Trojan that allows unauthorized remote access to your computer. According to Symantec, this Trojan operates with the privileges of the logged-on user and listens for commands from anyone who connects and can perform various actions, such as the following:
• Download a file
• Execute a file
• Send a directory listing to the remote attacker
• Send files to the remote attacker
• Modify the registry

The solutions recommended by US-CERT are: remove the Arucer.dll file, remove "Run DLL as an App" exclusion from the Windows Firewall, and block or restrict network access. Energizer acknowledged the security issue. It has removed this software download and are now directing consumers to download an uninstall software that should eliminate the vulnerability.

AVE.exe (Total Vista Security) Virus Removal

2010-03-22T21:42:00.011-04:00

I recently wrote about removal of fake security alert Anti-Virus System Pro. The main step in the removal procedure was restarting PC in safe mode and running Malwarebytes (mbam.exe). Unfortunately, it does not work with a new modification of this virus, called Total Vista Security that runs a program file ave.exe. This program continues running in safe mode and prevents you from starting mbam. So, how to stop it? You can temporarily stop ave.exe process via Task Manager but it reappears in a moment. What does ave.exe do? Basically it does the same as similar fake security alert malware- it prevents you from opening any program on an infected computer and is trying to trick you into buying their software. Don't pay them - you can fix the problem for free in minutes. I managed to get rid of this malware just by restoring my computer to a previous date.

To use the system restore while this virus is running you can begin as if you are restarting the computer in safe mode via Start menu:
Start> Shut Down>Restart.
When Windows shuts down and the screen becomes blank, start hitting F8 key until you hear a beep and a menu appears. Select Safe Mode with Networking, hit Enter and then hit Enter again on selection of your operating system (such as Windows XP). After computer restarted and you logged in, it asks you if you want to proceed into Safe mode or use System Restore. Select System Restore and choose a past date when you are sure you had no viruses. Note that this process does not affect your files, only the programs you might install or update since the restore date you chose. After restoring your system you should be able to download (if you have not done it yet) and run free Malwarebytes (mbam.exe). Just update it to the latest version first. The above ave.exe removal guide does not constitute a professional advice: if you choose to use it, do it at your own risk. It worked for me, but of course I can't guarantee it would work for everyone.

Meeting Energy Efficiency Standards for External Power Supplies

2010-03-11T12:24:00.010-05:00

I previously wrote about the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA 2007). Its Section 301 establishes efficiency standards for external power supplies (EPS), such as power adapters. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has recently published a Final Rule on "Energy Conservation Program: Certification, Compliance, and Enforcement Requirements for Certain Consumer Products and Commercial and Industrial Equipment." In this document under section 430.24 (bb), is the requirement for determining the number of EPS units to be tested to claim compliance with EISA 2007. In short, the DOE document requires 97.5% confidence level to reflect variations in materials, the manufacturing process, and testing tolerances.

The Section 24(bb) of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 430 states:
For each basic model of external power supply selected for testing, a sample of sufficient size shall be selected at random and tested to ensure that—

(1) Any represented value of the estimated energy consumption of a basic model for which consumers would favor lower values shall be no less than the higher of: (i) The mean of the sample, or (ii) The upper 97.5 percent confidence limit of the true mean divided by 1.05;

and

(2) Any represented value of the estimated energy consumption of a basic model for which consumers would favor higher values shall be no greater than the lower of: (i) The mean of the sample, or (ii) The lower 97.5 percent confidence limit of the true mean divided by 0.95.

To demonstrate compliance with EISA 2007 standards for Class A EPSs (in effect since July 1, 2008), manufacturers must test representative sample of units according to the DOE test procedure, and certify their compliance by submitting a compliance statement and the first certification report to DOE by July 6, 2010.

To translate their language to plain English, when they say the "represented value of energy consumption for which consumers would favor higher values" they refer to the efficiency. Conversely, the "represented value for which consumers would favor lower values" is input watts. (Our lawmakers of course presume they know what we, the consumers would favor. Would you favor a charger with 51% efficiency over a charger with 49% if the latter one costs twice less?)

To determine the number of the samples to be tested to confirm the compliance with 97.5% confidence level, the manufacturers would have to revisit the statistical analysis theory. To be able to sell the affected external power supplies in US, they have to do the testing, the math, and to submit the required docs to DOE by 07/06/10.

Antivirus System Pro- How to Remove It for Free

2010-01-22T12:10:00.008-05:00

During the last few months there have been massive attacks against personal computers by so-called Anti-Virus System Pro, Antivirus Pro 2010 or similar. Once installed in your PC it is constantly barraging you with fake security alerts, such as that your computer is being attacked from an Internet (which is true except they are the attackers), will impersonate Windows Security Center with fake security alerts, etc. and will be continuously trying to trick you into buying their software by asking you to activate their protection. They are trying to scam you to paying some $50 for three months of so-called protection. (Would you give thieves your credit card to buy back your things they stolen from you?) Common anti-virus software programs do not seem to be able to prevent these attacks. The main difficulty with removing Antivirus System Pro and similar trojans is these malwares prevent you from running any program such as task manager, web browser, or antivirus software, claiming that these program files are infected.

I know people who wind up reformatting their hard drive because they could not find a way of getting rid of this infection. When I first got this virus, I've spent hours searching the web from my other computer looking for the procedures to remove it. Likely, there is a simple way of removing Anti Virus System Pro for free. The main thing to do is to restart your computer in Safe Mode. One can do it from the start menu: Start>Shut Down>Restart. Once the computer shuts down and begins restarting [while you still have blank screen], start hitting the key F8 until you hear beeps and a menu appears. In this menu, select Safe mode with Networking. Once your computer restarted in safe mode, you should be able to connect to Internet and download a free version of the program called Malwarebytes. Save it to your desktop and install. After installation firstly run Update. It took me a few minutes to install updated version. Then run Full Scan. It took it several hours to run a full scan, but it did find plenty malware files. When it finish scanning, select Display Results and then select Remove all selected malware. If you have any antivirus program installed, you can now run it too. Malwarebytes may then ask you to restart your computer. You can now restart it in a regular way and you should be OK. Note that their free version does not provide live protection- it only activates manually. I have not tried Malwarebytes paid version (at least because I already have one licensed antivirus program installed), so I can't tell if their live protection is solid. One more thing: the malware sometimes changes Internet Explorer connection setting to Proxy. If your IE does not connect to Internet in safe mode or after the clean-up, try this: Tools> Internet Options> Connections> LAN settings, then if Proxy Server is checked and you are not using proxy, uncheck Proxy Server and hit OK.

The above procedure worked for me, but of course I can't guarantee it will work for everyone. If you choose to go through these steps, you do it at your own risk- I don't give you any professional advices. Also, the malicious programs are being constantly updated. They may possibly invent a new trick that interferes with the above removal procedure. It's a shame that Microsoft Corp. with all its funds and resources as well as the anti-virus software firms so far can't provide live protection against a bunch of criminals.

No-Spill Gas Cans Recall Due to Leaks

2010-01-07T21:52:00.006-05:00

If you bought between August and November 2009 a red plastic 5-gallon gasoline container made by No-Spill, check it out for leaks at the black plastic collar where the spout connects to the can. The company just announced a recall of the cans with date codes AIP09202 through AIP09222. For info see The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). A leaky gas tank presents fire and burn hazards because gasoline and its fumes are very flammable. Note that even with a good container, you should always shut down a gas generator before the refueling.

Free Airport Internet Access

2009-11-18T14:51:00.006-05:00

In case you did not know about it, Google is currently providing air travelers at 47 US airports free Wi-Fi internet access. The free service began on November 10 and runs till January 15, 2010. It particularly includes Las Vegas, San Jose, Boston, Baltimore, Burbank, Houston, Indianapolis, Seattle, Miami, Ft. Lauderdale, Orlando, St. Louis and Charlotte. At Seattle-Tacoma (SEA) and Burbank (BUR) airports, the service will continue indefinitely. During the same period, all passengers on Virgin America airline will also have free in-flight internet access in their airplanes as a gift from Google. Google just asks to make voluntary charitable contributions [which they said they would match up $250K] in lieu of connectivity payment to some charities. And of course, you have carry your own laptop- it's not time yet for complimentary in-flight laptops- so far you can only count on head phones, and some airlines may charge you even for them.

Medical Power Supplies: New Efficiency Standards are Ahead

2009-11-05T19:44:00.005-05:00

This week the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has published a notice of proposed rule on its "Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Determination Concerning the Potential for Energy Conservation Standards for Non-Class A External Power Supplies." In this document, DOE proposes to determine that energy conservation standards for so-called non-Class A external power supplies (EPS). Class A in DOE terminology refers to single output EPS with nameplate power under 250 watts.

For reference, currently there are three domestic programs that mandate certain minimum efficiency levels of external power supplies: the Federal mandatory standard for Class A EPSs, the EPA’s voluntary ENERGY STAR standard, and California’s mandatory standard for so-called ‘‘State Regulated EPSs.’’ They all apply to low-power single-output units and particularly exclude medical supplies. Did you think the government would let anything to be unregulated? Nah! The DOE is now is trying to regulate efficiency of four more types of external power supplies that do not fall under class A: (1) Multiple output EPS (2) EPS above 250 W, (3) EPS for medical use, and (4) EPS for battery charging. The new proposed rule can affect power supplies for a wide variety of applications such as amateur radio equipment, Xbox 360, nebulizers for home use and other medical equipment, cordless power tools, etc. Note that this rule does not set any specific standards yet; it only positively determines that future standards may be warranted and should be explored in an energy conservation standards rulemaking. DOE will be accepting comments by December 18, 2009, after which it will make an actual determination.

Green Electricity From Cars

2009-10-07T21:40:00.003-04:00

This week an Israeli firm Innowattech performed a successful trial of their alternative energy system that generates "green" electricity from vibration caused by passing cars. The system was installed on a 10 meter strip of asphalt on a highway and powered the street lights set up next to this strip. It used special piezoelectric generators embedded in the asphalt 2 inches below its top level. The generators were mounted with electronic cards that fed voltage into a storage system.

Piezoelectric effect in general is the generation of a voltage by certain solid dielectric materials when a mechanical stress is applied to them. It has been known for more then a century, and is widely used in piezoelectric transformers for high-voltage power supplies, various transducers, sensors, cigarette lighters, and other low-power applications. The Innowattech's system called IPEG™ is probably the first practical high-power application of piezoelectricity. According to the company, the installation of their system stretching one kilometer would produce 200 kW per hour on single traffic lane, or 1 megawatt on a four lane highway. Installation of the piezo-generators and electronic cards can be performed during paving of new roads or during the maintenance work. The "traffic energy" can be either supplied back to the drivers by powering the road lights or fed into the electric grid. A variation of IPEG™ can also produce power from pedestrian movement. Harvesting energy from the vibrations created by people walking on the floor is also being researched by East Japan Railway Company, who installed “Power-Generating Floor” in a Tokyo station.

Innowattech estimates the cost of energy harvesting from roads, railways and runways via IPEG™ to be 3 to 10 cents per kilowatt, which is comparable to the cost of renewable energies.

Cheap Small Generators

2009-07-31T18:42:00.007-04:00

If you consider buying a cheap small electric generator for emergency purposes, now it's the right time to do it. A year from now you probably won't find a cheap portable generator for sale because of the new EPA exhaust emissions standards that will take effect in 2011. These new standards apply to all so-called Small Nonroad Spark-Ignition (SI) Engines and Equipment with engines up to 19 kW used in household and commercial applications, including lawn and garden equipment, utility vehicles, generators, and a variety of other construction, farm, and industrial equipment. The standards are intended to reduce hydrocarbon emissions from small SI engines by about 35%, and are similar to the requirements adopted previously by the California Air Resources Board (CARB). Of course, as every government regulation, this one comes with a price tag. To comply, the manufacturers have to improve engine combustion and add catalysts. They will have to apply on an annual basis for the certification and pay a certification fee. The extra cost of course will be passed to us, the consumers.

Major domestic manufacturers of gensets such as Generac and Briggs & Stratton, are already CARB-compliant, so likely they will be EPA-certified as well. However their models cost typically twice as much as some cheap imports. Right now you can still buy a small non-CARB compliant portable genset made in China for about $100 per kW power. And if you worry about environment- emergency generators should not be an issue of our concern: maybe you would use them a few hours a year, or maybe you would never use them at all. Of course, portable generators are also used for non-emergency purposes such as on construction sites. However, as CARB's Fact Sheet admitted, small engines (which besides gensets include lawn mowers and a variety of other construction and garden equipment that is used more frequently) comprise only about one percent of California’s air pollution inventory! If EPA wanted to fight this 1% pollution, it could at least allow the non-compliant models to be sold with a label "for emergency use only". Could it be that EPA employees driving to and from their work for years while working on this project, caused a greater environmental impact that all portable emergency generators combined?

Environmental Design of Electrical Equipment Act and Mercury in Your Mouth

2009-06-25T19:57:00.005-04:00

Although most of US electronic industry has converted to a ROHS-compliant manufacturing, up until now there was no a legal requirement in US to meet ROHS regulations except for the state of California. The electronic manufacturers switched to ROHS-compliant products primarily in order to sell them to Europe, Japan, and some other countries, and because many customers were requesting ROHS compliance. However, when a product is not shipped to the geographical areas where ROHS or similar regulations are enforced by a law, and the compliance is not requested by a customer, it is basically up to the manufacturer to choose the components and the soldering technology.

Now there is a possibility a ROHS compliance would soon become a federal law. A legislation have been recently introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives that imposes restrictions on the use of lead, mercury and other materials in many types of electrical products and equipment.
The proposed legislation, designated H.R. 2420 and referred to as Environmental Design of Electrical Equipment Act (EDEE), would amend the federal Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) to provide national regulatory standards for the use of some potentially hazardous substances. According to the bill, ‘electroindustry products’ manufactured after July 1, 2010 must not contain lead, mercury, hexavalent chromium, polybrominated biphenyls (PBBs), polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) and cadmium in the concentration levels that are consistent with EU's RoHS Directive.

The bill particularly states: "It is the purpose of this Act to enhance the economic, environmental, and social well-being of the people of the United States in the global marketplace".

Well, I wonder how for example mandating a lead-free solder technology that is known to have potential long-term reliability issues, whose implementation requires extra spending, and which is not driven by free market forces, would enhance our economic well-being?

I also wonder, how come for example mercury is not OK in electronics, but OK in your mouth? It is interesting that currently in the US and in most European countries there is no restriction on the use of dental mercury amalgam fillings. So far only Sweden, Denmark and Norway ban mercury use in dental fillings, while all members of EU restrict its use in electronics devices. Of course, mercury, lead and other toxic substances in electronic devices present a health threat only if you have a habit of chewing printed circuit boards. Contrary to this, mercury in your mouth presents a much more probable health issue. According to some studies, amalgam fillings leach mercury into the mouth and mercury vapor can be inhaled during the fillings removal, although FDA disputes the effects of this exposure.

The state of California is a bit more consistent with the toxic substances issue. It at least mandates the following notice: "Notice to Patients, Proposition 65: Warning on dental amalgams, used in many dental fillings, causes exposure to mercury, a chemical known to the state of California to cause birth defects or other reproductive harm. Root canal treatments and restorations including fillings, crowns and bridges, use chemicals known to the state of California to cause cancer. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has studied the situation and approved for use all dental restorative materials. Consult your dentist to determine which materials are appropriate for your treatment. "

However, currently neither CA, or federal laws restrict mercury use in dental fillings. Apparently, for our lawmakers mercury is hazardous only in landfills but not in your mouth.