Hacker News Reader

Comment by Max-q | Hacker News Reader

Today, with swichmode supplies, I think DC would make most sense. We lose much power to frequency deviation and inductive loads causing phase shift.

It would also make sense to have a high voltage and low voltage nets in houses. Low voltage for lighting and other low power equipment. High voltage for power hungry equipment. For example 48V and 480V.

View on HN

DC high voltage (200v) is very dangerous and pernicious, and mores difficult to switch on and off because of arcs.

Very old US light switches often had both AC and DC current ratings, and the DC rating was noticeably lower due to the arcing problem, even with fast-acting snap action.

My grandfather worked in a Chicago office building that had 110V DC service even into the 1960s. He had to be careful to buy fans, radios, etc. that could run on DC.

Yes, it’s more dangerous, but technically “high voltage” doesn’t start until 1500 V DC (and 1000 V RMS for AC) by most standards (e.g. IEC 60038)

Do we really lose much to phase shift? Increasing apparent load only causes a tiny fraction of that much waste, and local compensation isn't very expensive.

DC or a significant frequency boost would be good inside a house for lights and electronic items. Not so great for distribution.

I'm not convinced multiple voltages would be a net benefit outside of the dedicated runs we already do for big appliances.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com