Period 3

1/21/2011

Start blogging by creating a new post. You can edit or delete me by clicking under the comments. You can also customize your sidebar by dragging in elements from the top bar.

97 Comments

Thomas Edison (HS)

1/24/2011 12:11:44 am

Bob Bobby (JG)

1/24/2011 12:12:18 am

Elbridge Gerry Lapnam (JM)

1/24/2011 12:13:40 am

27,16

Tom Travis (CH)

1/24/2011 12:14:25 am

I've been working in the copper mines,
all the livelong day...

William Brimage (MM)

1/24/2011 12:16:27 am

2136

Billy "Bubba" Williams (KE)

1/24/2011 12:18:55 am

I work in the coal mines... yay...

John Tyler Morgan (LB)

1/24/2011 12:19:03 am

24,01

Milton Adams (SN)

1/24/2011 12:20:03 am

I am the assistant of Edison. yay

William McKinley (C.L)

1/24/2011 12:20:58 am

I am the 25th president of these united states and also was an Ohio Representative in the house of representatives before i was nominated for presidency

Grover Cleveland (JC)

1/24/2011 12:25:06 am

grrr!

Frank Bell (MT)

1/24/2011 11:05:41 am

Nikola Tesla (MD)

1/25/2011 05:04:43 am

Im Tesla and I love electricity. Only AC of course.

Nikola Tesla (MD)

1/28/2011 04:29:07 am

Through my research, I have found that AC is more efficient than DC. AC can easily travel long distances, while DC can only travel about a mile at reasonable voltages. In addition, AC power can use hydroelectric power, which generates huge amounts of energy and is renewable. DC, on the other hand, is generated by coal, which is non-renewable. DC appliances have to be replaced often, while AC appliances are more durable.The AC power that could be produced by Niagara Falls would require a million tons of coal to equal in DC power. In addition, the motors I have designed for AC are much more efficient than the current DC motors. For these reasons, I think that AC should be the form of power to wire America.

Billy "Bubba" Williams (KE)

1/30/2011 02:57:36 am

My name is Bubba, and I, as a coal miner, support DC over AC power. Really, either AC or DC could work in the mines, but DC is more beneficial to us. The coal miners and I have a hard time transporting the materials from under the surface, to above the ground. So, we have tried many methods, like the small steam locomotive. The small steam locomotive wasn’t too expensive, but on the other hand, it caused too much pollution. Next, the compressed-air locomotive was tried out. That worked just fine, but it began to turn towards electric locomotives. So now, the idea of having cables run through the mines is out. That uses DC to run, and in The Hillside Coal & Iron Company, they are already using it, and so far, it seems to be working alright. That would be so helpful to us. Coal is the source to many things, like heat in some houses. We all need heating at some point in the winter. The mining companies need some help, & DC power can give that to us.

Bob Bobby (JG)

1/30/2011 03:05:40 am

I am the Government Representative from New Jersey and I believe that AC would cost less than DC. Over long distances, AC will maintain almost all of its voltage (1500-2000 volts) while DC needs a power plant every three or four miles to maintain it's voltage (100-250 volts). Using AC would allow rural farmers to have low cost electricity which DC could not supply. Using DC could cost the government millions of dollars to build all of the power plants it needs. AC can be powered by a hydroelectric plant, which uses water to power its motor instead of coal like DC. Also, coal is not a reusable material and has to constantly be mined. AC appliances last longer so using AC will save the consumer money. Do to all the facts listed above, I believe that AC is the better choice for both New Jersey and America.

Frank Bell(MT)

1/30/2011 05:43:46 am

I am the governor of Nevada, and I support AC. As a lot of you know, New York gets great business from Niagara Falls, a hydroelectric power source , which AC powers. As for me and my state AC would be the best choice because we would use a similar idea that New York uses. We would use alternating current to power our hydroelectric dam along the Colorado River to supply Nevada with power, great businesses and a lot of jobs!! If DC is chosen instead of AC, I will not be able to use my wonderful idea of a hydroelectric power source, because DC does not use that source. In conclusion, I strongly feel AC is the best choice, for my state, Nevada.

Frank Bell (MT)

1/30/2011 06:49:36 am

I agree with Bob Bobby and Nikola Tesla that AC cost less than DC and AC can travel at a longer distance. The estimated amount of water that flows from Niagara Falls is about 100,000,000 tons per hour!! Putting all the data together, we found that an estimated 6,800,000 horse power was produced. Also that amount of horse power(if it had to be produced by steam) could create more than a million tons of coal per annum. In Addition a copper pole, 3 inches in diameter, can transfer 1,000 horse power about 30 miles, so when we add more poles, the horse power can travel at a longer distance. AC is much more efficient and cheaper than DC.

Thomas Edison (HS)

1/30/2011 08:30:16 am

My name is Thomas Edison and I am the inventor of direct current. As the inventor I believe that DC is better and more cost efficient than AC. There are many reasons that I think this but most importantly it is safer. Any contact at all with wires carrying alternating current will most likely result in immediet death or fatal injury. Also direct current has the ability to go very long distances at a high voltage. DC is also powered by coal and copper which provide jobs because they need to be mined, so DC id better for the economy. DC is much safer, as well as much more practical than AC.

William McKinley (CL)

1/30/2011 08:33:24 am

Hi, my name is William McKinley and I think that DC is the better current for electricity across the United States. It could save your life if you ever have a heart attack and it powers most of our electronics today, so it would cost a lot of money to transfer to AC. Light companies have decided to charge $20 a month for one light bulb for a factory or household that uses that light all night long, using AC. And they charge $15 a month for one light bulb for a factory or household that uses that light up until 12 o’clock at night, using AC. And after that the prices just get worse and worse. If we transferred to AC we would have to install smaller capacitors on every circuit, which would take time and effort and money the government doesn’t have right now. The smaller capacitors would also need to be strong a sturdy, which is hard to do because the smaller the capacitor the less it withstands. So, if we switched to AC it would cost us a lot of money and then we would be in a deficit. I think we should just stick with DC.

Milton Adams (SN)

1/30/2011 09:36:21 am

Milton Adams (SN)

1/30/2011 09:38:39 am

Hello, my name is Milton Adams. I support Dc. I support Dc because Ac is very dangerous. According to Testimony of the Wizard, Ac can harm and kill animals, just as my boss, Thomas Edison believed. Also in Electricity on Animals, people were testing Ac to see if they could use it to punish criminals. If I were a criminal, I would not want to get near Ac! Only good things come to Edison proved in the article Edison Again Successful. Westinghouse was restrained from making, selling, and using the lamp that Edison created. Edison was Successful in this.
Dc is the best electricity because for one we don’t use it the punish criminals. Also Edison doesn’t take Westinghouse’s ideas or creations. Dc is definitely the truest and honest company. Also Dc can travel longer distances with a higher voltage. I might coast more than Ac, but it is worth your time and money, sometimes the thing that is less expensive, may not be the one with the better quality.

Francis Jehl(AP)

1/30/2011 09:26:49 pm

Direct current is the better power for many reasons. DC is much safer than AC. Alternating current is proven to be more dangerous for humans. When tested on animals, alternating current was more painful to the animals than direct current was. Alternating current has also killed many people. Direct current uses about 110 V-220 V whereas AC uses 1000 V. DC needs less voltage then AC. DC also has less resistance then AC, so it has more of a constant flow, compared to alternating, which doesn’t. Direct current generators are less complex then alternating current generators. This is another reason that direct current is better! Although alternating current may be less expensive, when it comes to safety, direct current is the way to go. So just think, would you rather spend less money and have dangerous AC, or have DC and be much safer?

Grover Cleveland ( JC)

1/30/2011 09:27:47 pm

I am the governor of new york, Grover Cleveland, and I think that Ac power is much more efficient and is much more cost worthy. Dc power uses more copper and and coal to generate electricity, while Ac can use water generated machines to generate electricity, so Dc uses nonrenewable resources and Dc has to pay for those materials so they charge more than AC. Electricity will become one of the governing factors of our nation in a short time, no matter which kind is being used. Therefore if people all use DC then Coal and Copper will be used extensively and could lead to shortages of those materials, and since they are nonrenewable once we encounter a shortage it will take a long time to grow the materials. As Bob Bobby said, the voltage for Ac power (1500 to 2000 volts) is much stronger than Dc's voltage (100-250 volts). And I also agree with Bob that Ac can go the distance without having to be regenerated by a power plant every now and then, and remember that for everything Dc pays for they are going to charge you more to cover the costs. In summary Ac power is more cost effective, powerful and is much safer for the next generations.

Frank Bell(MT)

1/31/2011 12:02:36 am

I completely agree with Grover Cleveland, in the sense that AC uses water, a renewable resource, while DC operates on coal and copper, both nonrenewable resources. I think it is better to be safe,and use a power source that not only travels farther, but is also better for the people and the environment.

Francis Jehl (AP)

1/31/2011 12:05:04 am

In reference to Tesla, AC may travel a longer distance, but it is not as safe as DC. So I disagree with you. DC is better for America and its people. DC should be the power to wire America. Direct current is better for us because it is safer than AC! AC has killed many people, so wouldn’t you rather be alive then have it travel a longer distance?

William Brimage (MM)

1/31/2011 12:07:04 am

As a respond to Tesla, I agree than AC can travel longer distances than DC, and that AC can power hydroelectric power. but it seems that DC is safer than AC and if AC is put in use then it can even lead to deaths of people. Do you consider that worth it?

Francis Jehl (AP)

1/31/2011 12:11:29 am

Billy "Bubba" Williams, I agree with you! DC is the most efficient source of power! Not only is it better for you, a coal miner, it is better for America! Direct current is the safest way to have power.

Billy

1/31/2011 12:14:13 am

To Grover Cleveland, as for the sentence that stated about “…if people use DC then Coal and Copper will be used extensively and could lead shortage to those materials, and since they are nonrenewable once we encounter a shortage it will take a long time grow the materials”, we, the coal miners, would not have a shortage if we were to use DC. DC gives us the efficiency, & speed, that we need to get the materials from under the surface, to where it needs to be, above the ground. So, then, that way, we wouldn’t have a shortage, because we would be getting the materials faster than the rate at which we use it for more power.

Billy

1/31/2011 12:16:26 am

As for my name above, I meant to put Billy Bubba" Williams (KE). Sorry.

Grover Cleveland

1/31/2011 12:17:56 am

• In response to “Bubba”, I wonder why you are so concerned with pollution yet you choose DC power which needs power plants to generate the power. These power plants produce tons of pollution into our air, so if you really want save Mother Earth go with AC power.

William Brimage

1/31/2011 12:20:38 am

In response to Billy Williams I can see that both AC and DC are useful for mine work. Even if DC is more beneficial for you,DC uses copper and coal to generate electricity, which are non renewable sorces. AC is also less expencive than DC and I belive that your company will like to pay less for the electricity they use, don’t you agree? And even if you have AC you can still work in the mines.

Francis Jehl (AP)

1/31/2011 12:23:13 am

In reference to Thomas Edison, you are right DC is the better choice! DC is safer and it helps with some jobs. It is better for America because it causes fewer deaths than AC and is better for the economy.

Frank Bell(MT)

1/31/2011 12:25:36 am

I disagree with Thomas Edison because AC travels at a longer distance at a higher voltage of 1500-2000 volts, while DC is only 100-250 volts, according to Grover Cleveland, who is the governor of New York and gets a lot of New York's power from Niagara Falls, which is powered by AC. To me AC is more efficient and better for the environment, because it uses renewable resources.

William McKinley

1/31/2011 12:29:54 am

1) I strongly disagree with Nikola Tesla. I think that AC appliances are much less durable because they are smaller and less sustainable for a long period of time. Also if we transferred to AC then we would put the country in a huge deficit because of how much AC costs to run electricity through the entire country. That is why I think that DC is the better choice for the US.

Francis Jehl(AP)

1/31/2011 05:00:57 am

In response to Milton Adams, I agree with you. DC is the better and more effective power. AC can harm animals, just like it can harm humans. Just like you said, DC is worth your time and money in the long run. AC has killed people, so would you rather spend more money and live, or save some money and end up dead? And again like you said DC is the truest company, because it is the safest.

Francis Jehl(AP)

1/31/2011 05:07:20 am

In response to Grover Cleveland, AC power is not better than DC. You said that AC power (1500 to 2000 volts) is much stronger than DC's voltage (100-250 volts), but this means to the touch, AC is deadly. It is not safe at all. It had killed people and will continue to kill people if it is chosen. It may be cheaper to buy, but it is cheap in quality as well. DC is a little more expensive but is worth it when it comes to safety.

Bob Bobby (JG)

1/31/2011 06:39:50 am

In response to Mr. Tesla’s post, I would agree that AC is able to travel a longer distance while maintaining a very high voltage compared DC which can only travel short distances which make it useless to people who live in a rural area. I commend you on your ability to design a superior system.
In response to Mr. William’s comments, I agree that coal is a needed material, but the amount needed to power the entire country would be a huge economic waste and waste the coal that could be used to heat houses.
In response to Mr. Bell’s post, I completely agree that the power generated from Niagara Falls is far superior to the energy that any coal mine could produce. The Colorado River can and should be used in a similar way. The amount of horse power generated is amazing and will power a large area.
In response to Mr. Edision’s comment, I believe that DC is truly not able to travel “long distance” at a “high voltage”, unless you consider 3 miles a long distance and 250 volts high voltage. AC can travel truly long distances at a truly high voltage of 2,000 volts.
In response to Mr. McKinley’s comment, the government already mainly uses AC because of its superiority over DC. Your facts are incorrect and it costs $20.00 to power not one, but three light bulbs all the time. It also only costs $15.00 to power three light bulbs until 12 o’clock. I ask you, how much would powering three light bulbs all the time on DC?
In response to Mr. Adam’s comment, I doubt that the people of this country would prefer to pay for all those power plants that need to be built to carry the low voltage of DC and pay all those mine workers to dig up non renewable coal, which we will eventually run out of, just for a little bit more safety.
In response to Mr. Jehl’s comment, you admit one of many of your own systems downfalls, low voltage. Having low voltage mean it can not travel as far and, even though it is safer, can not be used to power machines that will need a higher voltage. AC is dangerous, but it is much better at traveling distance and keeping its needed voltage.
In response to Mr. Cleveland’s post, I completely agree that the cost of the materials needed for DC will snowball until it becomes a big fat bill on a consumers desk. AC only uses water and needs far fewer power plants and it will cost far less for the general public than DC.

William McKinley

1/31/2011 07:34:30 am

2) In reference to Billy “Bubba” Williams post I think that he is exactly right. DC is the best power source for the US. It would benefit many miners and wouldn’t make the country go into a deficit. We would also increase the need for coal which would give many people jobs of which, currently, they don’t have
3) I strongly disagree with Bob Bobby’s post. I think that DC would be the better choice for the US because using DC could save millions of lives from heart attacks: its voltage can shock somebody while unconscious and then would save them from dying. Also it costs 20 dollars a month to be able to run one light bulb in a factory all night long using AC and 15 dollars just to run it up to 12 o’clock at night. Therefore, AC would cost the government millions where as DC wouldn’t really cost a thing because it is what we are currently using today.
4) I strongly disagree with Frank Bell’s post because although it might power your state it can’t power all the way across the US. And if the entire country relied on one source then we would eventually run Niagara Falls dry and it would malfunction and crash and the entire country would not have any electricity. However, if we used DC then our problem would be solved and the country would be relying on many different sources, which is better because they wouldn’t crash all at once. And DC would cost less than AC so the country wouldn’t be in a multi million deficit like we would be if we used AC.
5) In reference to Thomas Edison’s post I agree with him. I think that DC is the better choice because it costs a lot less than AC and it is also a lot safer. It doesn’t hurt you if you make contact with a wire carrying DC where as if you touched a wire carrying AC then you would probably die. And if we went to AC the capacitors needed are smaller and less sustainable than that of DC so we would end up buying many of them and spending a lot just to get it set up. So we should use DC to keep people in work and to not spend that much on electricity, after all we don’t really need it.
6) In reference to Milton Adams’ post I agree with him. I think that DC is the better current for the US because it costs a whole lot less than AC also it is safer. To run an AC light bulb all the time you have to be paying 20 dollars a month and just to run it up until 12 o’clock at night you would have to pay 15 dollars a month. That is why we need to stay with DC, which we are using currently: does not kill anybody or anything and it can’t punish criminals; we have poison injections for that we don’t need to shock them. DC is the better current because it costs very little and doesn’t kill/hurt.
7) In reference to Francis Jehl’s post I agree with him all the way. I think that DC is the better current because it costs a lot less than AC and it doesn’t kill anybody or anything and can sometimes save peoples’ lives. If you go down in a heart attack and the AED arrives you will be shocked with DC and it might save your life. Also if you touch a wire carrying DC you won’t be shocked but if you touch a wire carrying AC you could die automatically. And the capacitors used in AC are less sustainable that those of DC because they are smaller and less durable. That is why DC is the better current
8) I strongly disagree with Grover Cleveland’s post. I think that DC is the better current because it can save peoples’ lives and it costs a lot less than AC. If you get a heart attack and the AED comes you will be shocked with DC voltage. It costs 20 dollars a month to power 1 light bulb all the time using AC. It costs 15 dollars a month to power 1 light bulb until 12 o’clock at night; Whereas DC costs a lot less than those dollar amounts. Also even though DC uses nonrenewable resources it would put a lot of minors and mine owners out of work if we started using electricity that didn’t use those materials that they are mining for. That is why we should use DC as our electricity source

William McKinley

1/31/2011 07:38:19 am

In reference to Bob Bobby’s response to my post I think you are the one who is mistaken. If you go to New York Times Newspapers and look at the article entitled cost you will find, after you read it, that it actually does cost 20 dollars a month to run a light bulb all the time and 15 dollars a month just to run it until 12 o’clock at night and the prices just go up from that. So DC is really the better current not AC.

Grover Cleveland

1/31/2011 07:39:33 am

In response to Francis Jehl, just to let you know, it does not take much over 100 volts to kill a man, so DC power is equally dangerous with less power. What is the point.

Grover Cleveland

1/31/2011 07:49:23 am

Yeah it does cost more to pay for AC power Mr. McKinley, but all the money DC power makes is going to Mr. Edison or mining companies, both of which give nothing back to country. AC power's cost is due to the fact that the power is generated waterfalls and other fast moving bodies of water. they have to pay the government for use of these. So it may cost more right now, but in the long run it will keep the money in the hands of the people and not the powerful aristocrats.

Grover Cleveland

1/31/2011 07:54:47 am

In response to Mr McKinley's post, it is a total lie that DC power has not killed anybody. Electricity is not safe, no matter which current you are using. You should not go around preaching about how AC is killing lots of people, because DC has killed a lot also. If you are so afraid of electricity go back to the stone ages, if not embrace the power that is electricity.

Frank Bell(MT)

1/31/2011 08:01:08 am

In response to Billy Williams I feel if you were concerned about pollution and what is good for the environment, then AC is the way to go, because it uses renewable resources like water ,unlike DC.

Frank Bell(MT)

1/31/2011 08:17:20 am

In response to William McKinley, I disagree. AC is much more efficient than DC. Through a copper pole 1,000 horse power was transferred for 30 miles!! Also, the total amount of horse power from Niagara Falls(which is powered by AC)was estimated to be about 6,800,000. In addition New York gets some of its power from the Falls, and a lot of business, which is good for the economy. DC however, has a voltage of only 100-250 volts, which to me does not sound powerful enough or efficient enough.

Frank Bell(MT)

1/31/2011 08:28:48 am

In response to Milton Adams, AC can travel not only longer than DC, but also at a higher voltage. The measured voltage for AC was 1500-2000 volts, while DC volts were 100-250. In addition the amount of horse power that came from Niagara Falls was measured to be about 6,800,000 volts. In conclusion AC can travel to Albany, which is 330 miles away, plus it is the capital of New York, a very powerful state.

Elbridge Gerry Lapnam(JM)

1/31/2011 09:57:24 am

In response to Nikola Tesla's posting, even though AC is faster and renewable, is it safer than DC? DC is suppose to be safer in electrical wiring and for AC can cause death or serious injuries. If you put AC in towns and cities aren’t you worried about law suits or for the people safe being? Your thoughts?

Elbridge Gerry Lapnam(JM)

1/31/2011 10:07:35 am

In response to Billy Williams posting, even though AC is more beneficial towards coal miners, AC also uses coal and copper, it is also costs less, wouldn’t your company be saving money by using AC? Isn’t that the whole reason for having a company is to make money, the coal miners would still have jobs, if AC took over there would be even more job opportunities due to the use of major water sources.

Elbridge Gerry Lapnam(JM)

1/31/2011 10:37:42 am

In response to Bob Bobby’s posting, AC does cost less but wouldn’t it be better to have a safe America than a cheap America? By needing more power plants, wouldn’t than give more jobs? In America isn’t it about the people and what would be better for the people?

Elbridge Gerry Lapnam(JM)

1/31/2011 10:42:37 am

In reply to Frank Bell’s posting, DC also creates many jobs and would be a huge help in coal and copper industries. Without the majority usage of copper and coal that DC would provide, that would leave thousands of people without jobs and hurt the economy. Your thoughts?
In response to Thomas Edison’s posting, even if DC is safer wouldn’t it be a lot better to have more advanced electricity? Isn’t a more advanced country a better one? Isn’t a cheaper an more efficient better?
In response to William Mckinley, AC has a greater distance, so if we stay with DC we would have to have more poles and loss money setting them up.
In response to Milton Adams , AC is more efficient and gets a greater distance, even though DC is better safety wise, isn’t it better to have better quality wise.
In response to Francis Jehl’s posting, even though DC is safer wouldn’t it be better to have a cheaper more quality electricity way than a more costly and less quality way?
In reply to Grover Cleveland’s posting, wouldn’t you instead of thinking about cost for your state be thinking about what makes for a safer home for your citizens, without people a state would have no reason, wouldn’t you want a place for your citizens to be safe?

Frank Bell(MT)

1/31/2011 10:52:29 am

In response to Francis Jehl, I disagree. To me, I feel that the higher the voltage, the better. AC's voltage is a lot higher than DC's voltage, so to me AC runs better, and also, AC runs better for a longer distance. AC can run all the way to Albany, which is 330 miles away. In conclusion, the generator for AC is newly designed and more efficient. Therefore, AC is a better and more efficient way to generate power.

Frank Bell(MT)

1/31/2011 11:05:55 am

In response to William Brimage, AC is the best choice for you, because not only can AC travel farther, but AC is more environmental friendly than DC. First of all, AC is a hydroelectric power source, AC uses water to generate electricity, a renewable source, unlike DC, which uses non renewable sources. So, if AC was to be chosen, there would be less pollution, and more Eco friendly generators. Causing the United States to be ahead in creating products that do not harm the environment.

Thomas Edison (HS)

1/31/2011 11:06:05 am

Thank you to all who support my system, Direct current! Your ideas are developed and educated! Thank you for considering the safety and welfare of the public! To all who contridict me- can you put a price on safety? Although Alternating current may be slightly more cost efficient, direct current provides the safety and reliablility that this country needs!

In response to Nikola Tesla's posting,I would like to point out that Direct current is not only powered by coal and copper. In some instances these resources are used but the mining of said materials provides jobs, therefor boosting the economy. Direct current is sometimes powered by a battery, which is good for the environment!

Dear, Billy “Bubbah” Williams, Thank you for your support of my system! I believe that your choice will prove benificial to your wellfare as well as the public’s. Thank you!

In response to Bob Bobby can you put a price on safety? Any contact at all with wires carrying alternating current will most likely result in death or fatal injury! Do you really want to put america in that kind of danger? Although Alternating current may be slightly more cost efficient, direct current provides the safety and reliablility that this country needs!

In response to Frank Bell of Nevada I disagree with your statement that AC is a better choice, while its means of generation may be benifitial to your state that does not mean it is benifitial to the other states. Whe are not called the UNITED states of America for no reason- you have to think of the welfare and safety of your county as a whole, not just your state.

In response to Milton Adams, thank you for your strong support of Direct Current. You are correct in your statements and also, a blast of 200 volts of Alternating current would surely kill a man instantly! Thank you for making the safest choice for our country!

In response to the comment by Grover Cleveland, While AC may be more cost efficient DC, in result of its use of coal and copper, will provide mining jobs and boost our economy, benifiting the country in the long term. LAlso There is no price for safety so make the safe choice and think reasonably!

Frank Bell(MT)

1/31/2011 11:17:42 am

In response to Elbridge Gerry Lapnam, AC creates jobs as well as DC. In New York, Niagara Falls is powered by AC, and creates jobs by helping on the new motor being used and building dynamos, as you can see AC creates jobs to help create the best power source for New York.

Milton Adams (SN)

2/1/2011 05:33:22 am

In reference to Nikola Tesla, Dc is generated by coal, but because it is generated by coal it gives many people jobs. Coal may be non-renewable, but we have plenty of coal in the world. Also Ac’s appliances are much smaller and less suitable than Dc’s appliances. If we were to change everything to Ac, many people would lose their jobs and it would cost a lot of money.
I strongly agree with Billy. There are lots of coal miners out there and if Ac were to “win” all of them would lose their jobs. Also we use coal to warm up our homes during the winter and if the coal miners were to lose their jobs, we wouldn’t have any coal to warm our houses.
I disagree completely with Bob. Using Ac for New Jersey and America would be a bad idea. If Ac were to “win” then we would have to build millions of the hydroelectric plants. Also we would always be very low on our water supply because not only would we need water for ourselves, but we would need water to supply the hydroelectric plants as well.
In response to Frank, I think that if we were to use the Colorado River and the Niagara Falls for our water to power the hydroelectric plants and dam, that it would later cause us some really big problems. I we were to have a drought, we would be forced to use the water from our rivers and springs, and if the plants and dams were using all of that water we would die of thirst! I wonder if that’s what you want for your people of New Jersey, or even for America.
I totally agree with Edison. Dc is way safer than Ac. If Ac “won” we would have more deaths in the word, but if Dc were to “win” we have a better economy and more jobs would be available. So, in conclusion, Dc is safer and provides more job opportunities.
I agree with William. We should stick with Dc. It gives us a safer environment and it would cost us less to convert to Dc because most of our electronics are already using Dc electricity. If we were to convert to Ac, it would take us a lot of money, time, and effort.
I agree with Francis. Dc is way safer than Ac. Also even though Ac is less expensive than Dc, Ac is way more dangerous than Dc. I would rather pay more and be safer than pay less and not be protected.
I disagree with Grover. Dc may use nonrenewable resources, but it gives much more people more jobs. Also water may not be the greatest source to use because, if we were to have a drought, the Ac plants would be using most of our water to power our electricity. If the drought were very severe, we might have to pick to have electricity or water to drink, and let me tell you it would not be an easy pick.

Milton Adams (SN)

2/1/2011 05:47:30 am

In response to Edison, you’re welcome. I am routing for Dc all the way.
In response to Elbridge, I think I would rather be safe than have better quality, plus I think Dc has a better quality.
In response to Frank Bell, even though Ac can travel faster at a longer distance, Dc is also way safer. It may cost more, but it is worth your money because I would rather have a safer energy source than a dangerous energy source.
In response to William, thank you for your support. I agree with you that Dc is much more safer than Ac and that the U.S. should convert to Dc.
In response to Bob, I think that if the people considered the fact that if we converted to Dc, that they would be much safer than having Ac they would probably chose Dc. Plus we would have to build numerous plants for Ac as well, so don’t think we won’t have to build plants for Ac as well.

William Brimage (MM)

2/1/2011 05:52:16 am

In response to Frank Bell, I agree that making the Colorado River use hydroelectric power to supply Nevada with power is a good idea, but AC is dangerous and DC can still power the city of Nevada perfectly well.

In response to Thomas Edison, I can see what you mean about DC being safer, and I agree with you. But the prices of AC are less than DC. And also AC can go longer distances than DC and that would mean putting more power plants to maintain the voltage of DC. Also, AC can still be used to work on the mines.

In response to William McKinley, Yes most of the electricity across the U.S now is DC power, but it is more expensive and changing to AC could save us money. Also, AC is powered with hydroelectric power that uses water not like DC that uses copper and coal which pollute more. Isn’t it better to have a greener planet?

In response to Milton Adams, AC may be dangerous but we can fix that by putting wires in the ground, and AC does not pollute as much as DC does. If we have the option to pollute less, then why not choose that?

In response to Francis Jehl, DC pollutes a lot and the prices are higher. And as you have mentions AC has more volts which can make power go faster. And if we have DC then we would have to get more power plants. Also, we can make AC safer by putting wires in the ground. So if they can both be safe then wouldn’t it be better to have something that costs less and pollutes less?

In response to Grover Cleveland, Yes AC may save more money but it is not completely safe. Also, we would now have to change all of our DC powered things to AC and that would be extremely expensive. So, if we can be safer and have a good power wouldn’t DC be better?

William McKinley

2/1/2011 05:58:58 am

In response to Grover Cleveland I think you do not understand what Mr. Edison and the mining companies give back to the country. They give us electricity and power, without them we would not be able to turn on a light bulb or cook on a stove. Also when AC uses the water sources we are alleviating ourselves of water and soon we might die of thirst. And Yes, I agree that DC may have killed some people but AC can kill people right on the spot and people considering it for punishment of death just makes me sick to the stomach to think about it. That is why we should use DC.

In response to Frank Bell, I think you may have a case of self centered-meant because you happen to be only thinking about your city and your state. What about the entire USA? What about the people in Washington and the president? New York isn’t the only thing that matters in this country. We need to find an electricity source that allows us to power the entire US not just New York, so try to think about the people around you not just you and your city, because DC is so much better than AC.
In response to Elbridge Gerry Lapnam’s post, I think you have run out of ideas to defend AC. DC is so much better because we can defend it for eternity: it can save your life when you have a heart attack (Ya it powers the AED); it is the electric source we use currently and it would cost a lot of money just to switch because with AC we would have to buy smaller capacitors which are less sustainable than the DC capacitors we use today. And also DC is the better choice because if we started using AC we would put all of the coal and copper miners out of their jobs because the electricity would no longer need the copper and coal that they are mining.

Thank you Mr. Milton Adams for agreeing with me; I totally agree that DC would provide a safer environment for the people of the US because it doesn’t kill you right on the spot. It also powers most of our electronics today and it would cost a lot of time and people and jobs and money to cooperate for us to follow through with AC, which is why we should use DC.

Frank Bell(MT)

2/1/2011 06:02:29 am

Thank-You to all who support me and AC.
In response to Milton Adams, I disagree; I believe in the long run AC will be better and more beneficial to the people, because AC, unlike DC uses renewable resources, like water, which will help reduce the amount of pollution and waste.
In response to Thomas Edison, I disagree; I believe that decreasing the amount waste and pollution will be better for the United States as a whole, because it will create a better living environment.

William McKinley(CL)

2/1/2011 06:04:37 am

No, Mr. Brimage, switching to AC would not save us money. It would only cost more because we would have to put different capacitors for the circuits and we would have to convert the entire country which would take time, money, effort, and people. Yes, I agree it is better to have a greener planet, but if we rely on water sources what will happen to all of our clean water that we drink (Ya, that’s right it would all disappear and go away because of how much we are using of it. So I think we should just stick with DC as we have been doing since electricity was invented.

William Brimage

2/1/2011 06:11:35 am

In response to Frank Bell, I can see what you mean by all of what you said about AC but it is still dangerous and I do not know if that is worth it. Plus all of the electricity we have right now is mostly DC so we would have to waste money in changing all of it to AC. Do you consider it worth it?

Grover Cleveland

2/1/2011 06:19:20 am

It really annoys me how you self righteous apparent do gooders go around spreading propaganda about AC. You users and supporters of DC have the audacity to say that AC will kill the citizens, yet you forget to mention something. That DC has killed people also. Then you say that AC can kill you because it has a higher voltage. Well guess what, both are powerful enough to kill you, so why does it matter that AC is stronger. It's not like it is going to make you deader than DC would. Don't leave out important key details when you are supposed to be telling truth. Remember, tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

Thomas Edison (HS)

2/1/2011 06:22:10 am

In response to mr.Frank Bell(MT, I would like to say that your point is a valid one but what would be the point of a clean environment that is dangerous. Choosing AC puts the country in a more immedeit and serious danger!

Frank Bell(MT)

2/1/2011 06:27:50 am

In response to William McKinley I am thinking of everyone when I say that AC reduces waste and pollution, thus creating a better living environment. AC is able to do this by using renewable resources, like water, but DC uses nonrenewable resources like coal. I am thinking of everyone when I say I would like to live in a country, with little or no pollution.
In response to William Brimage AC is not only healthier, but cheaper. Nevada is a new and devolving state, so we look at other successful states such as New York. New York is a very successful state, and they just happen to get their power from Niagara Falls. I looked into it and thought I could do that same thing with Nevada. AC can power the state of Nevada with a better cost, and with little waste, because, as a resource, water will power our power source. In conclusion it cost about 20 dollars per horse power to power AC, but Dc cost 21 dollars per horse power. It may not be a huge difference, but after a while it will add up.

Grover Cleveland

2/1/2011 06:33:15 am

McKinely, despite your slang I do get what you mean, but what you fail to realize is that powering the generator is not making the water undrinkable, it is just that you are ignorant and have not taken the time to do research on a topic that I know oh so well. Also i would like to add for those of you who have stated that getting rid of AC would close off copper mines and would result in loss of jobs. Well just to let you know AC still uses copper, just less. Another thing Mr. McKinely is that you stated that "It would only cost more because we would have to put different capacitors for the circuits and we would have to convert the entire country which would take time, money, effort, and people." You even admit in your own words that this would require man power, that would open a lot more jobs. Also what is a defibrillator.

Grover Cleveland

2/1/2011 06:36:11 am

Mr. Edison are you just so arrogant and full of yourself that you ignore everything that I have stated, because if you would have read you would see that DC is equally dangerous as AC.

Billy "Bubba" Williams

2/1/2011 06:37:07 am

In response to Frank Bell, I disagree. Is Nevada the only state that is going to use this power source? No, therefore, we must use what is beneficial to the whole country.

In regards to Thomas Edison, I completely agree with you. DC is the way to go! It could benefit the we the coal miners. Thank you!

As for William McKinley, I agree with you. DC is better is general. It is a complete better idea to stick with DC over AC. Thank you for agreeing!

Dear Milton Adams, I agree with you in regards to supporting DC. Shouldn’t it scare people who are for AC that it could kill them? I think it would scare me, & I am a coal miner.

Francis Jehl, DC is definitely the way to go, I completely agree. Spending less is no big deal compared to the lives we could be saving if we chose DC over AC. Thank you for agreeing with me too!

Grover Cleveland, I am not the one who said that pollution was the issue. I am just telling you what my boss had told me & the guys. I do care for the environment, yes. But what would you rather have, polluted air or people dying off? You tell me. Yes, AC would be fine for us, but I do think that DC would be much more beneficial.

In response to Bob Bobby, how would be wasting? I am confused on that point. If we use DC, then we would have a higher rate gathering, compared to usage. Therefore, we can provide the country with more as needed without being too far behind demand.

In reply to Elbridge Gerry Lapnam, DC can help us transfer the materials though, which therefore, can give us more materials to power the DC.

Grover Cleveland

2/1/2011 06:55:35 am

Bubba, why don't you stop letting others think for you, because trust me, they do not share your interests. Also i would like to add that by polluting our air we could potentially kill millions instead of just a few hundred. So should we spare a handful only to let their kids and grandchildren die of the poisons in the air, or should we sacrifice a few to save many?

Frank Bell(MT)

2/1/2011 08:53:05 am

In response to Billy Williams I think a country with less waste and pollution is beneficial to everyone. By using water, a renewable source, to power our source, we can say that AC decreases waste and pollution.

Thomas Edison (HS)

2/1/2011 08:53:46 am

Bob Bobby (JG) I would like to say that while AC may be able to travle further DC is still within good reason. Also the system that opperates direct current is much less complex than the one that opperates AC, so therefor even if we have to build power plants every 3 to 4 miles it would still be easier and less complex than building AC power systems.

Nikola Tesla (MD)

2/1/2011 08:58:32 am

In response to Milton Adam's and Thomas Edison's responses, while copper and coal mining do provide jobs, who says that hydroelectric plants don't provide them as well? Also, the thousands of power plants that would have to be built to use DC widely would be enormous, and would most likely be more than what it would cost to replace a few DC appliances with AC.

Nikola Tesla (MD)

2/1/2011 09:01:15 am

In response to Francis Jehl's response, I think you are underestimating DC's killing power as well. DC can be just as fatal as AC if touched.

Nikola Tesla (MD)

2/1/2011 09:03:06 am

Thanks for agreeing with me, Frank Bell, and all of your facts are true. It's those numbers that prove how much better of a power AC is than DC.

Nikola Tesla (MD)

2/1/2011 09:03:59 am

Nikola Tesla (MD)

2/1/2011 09:08:14 am

In response to William Brimmage's reply, if well educated in electrical safety, much of the dangers of AC can be all but diminished. There can also be safety measures taken in order to prevent deaths by electricity. Also, you even said yourself, and I think that the deaths of a few careless people misusing electricity would be worth a fantastic energy source for America, because, of course, everything comes with a price.

Nikola Tesla (MD)

2/1/2011 09:11:24 am

"Also if we transferred to AC then we would put the country in a huge deficit because of how much AC costs to run electricity through the entire country." I think that when you said this, Mr. McKinley, you were forgetting that if DC was used, it would still cost a lot, because of the regenerating stations that would need to be built.

Nikola Tesla (MD)

2/1/2011 09:14:18 am

In response to Elridge Gerry Lapnam, electricity is always dangerous, no matter what. DC can kill just as much as AC if misused. There will always be accidents involving electricity, but the benefits of AC rule out the possibility of fatalities still present in DC anyways.

Nikola Tesla (MD)

2/1/2011 09:30:40 am

In addition, thank you to all the people who support AC and my dream. Together, we can make AC the best electricity system for America! AC will power our nation!

Thomas Edison (HS)

2/1/2011 09:37:35 am

In response to Elbridge Gerry Lapnam(JM)I would like to say that while AC may be more cost efficient in some ways DC is far more economicaly benificial in the long run because it will boost the economy by creating jobs in the coal and copper mines. You cannot put a price on the safety of this country, we need to focus on the basics in this country, such as safety, before economics!!

William McKinley

2/1/2011 10:09:49 am

Mr. Cleveland i don't know what a defribrillator is but a capacitor is pretty much the switch on a circuit using DC or AC and AC capacitors are smaller and less sustainable than DC capacitors. So we should use DC.

Mr. Tesla regnerating plants would also have to be built for AC as well as DC so they both would cost a lot but AC much more because it happens to use water which is very expensive currently in the US and we shouldn't use it as a resource that will one day still be there because it won't. So we should use DC.

Frank Bell(MT)

2/1/2011 10:24:25 am

Thank You Tesla for agreeing with me.

Francis Jehl (AP)

2/1/2011 11:32:56 am

Grover Cleveland, 100 volts may kill a man, but AC’s higher voltage is more painful! AC’s voltage is much higher, so yes to the touch it is going to hurt a whole lot more than if you touch DC’s lower voltage. AC has also killed many more people! Elbridge Gerry Lapnam, first of all you just admitted that DC is safer, so that is defiantly saying that DC is better. Second, AC is not more quality than DC. AC is less expensive but cheaper and less quality. DC is more expensive but is safer and is better quality. So I would like DC, the safer and best quality power. Thomas Edison, I’m glad we agree because if we did not, I would not work for you, which I love. So yay DC! Milton Adams, I am happy that we have the same view on this! People should not put a price on safety (which is what they are doing when sayings AC is better because of the price). It is good to know there are others who agree with me. William Brimage, DC is still the better option. Even if you put the wires underground, they are still more dangerous. Also if we switching to AC would cost a lot, so wouldn’t you rather have a safer and in the long run a less expensive power? Billy “Bubba” Williams, I’m glad we both agree! DC is defiantly better! Tesla, I am aware of DC’s power. Yes it can be fatal, but AC is more painful because of the amount of voltage. If touched by AC, you would suffer a lot more then the quicker death of DC. Bob Bobby, so you are saying you would rather have power that travels farther and would kill you then a safer and less distance power? You value longer distance over life? You are wrong and crazy. You should want to live and care for the life of others instead of having a longer distance it can travel. William McKinley, I strongly agree with you! It is good to know that other people feel the same way about AC/DC other than me! You are right, DC is better! Frank Bell, I do not think you would feel the same way if you were shocked by a higher voltage. You say the higher voltage the better, well not always. If shocked by AC(higher voltage), you would die suffering. AC had killed many more people than DC. So do you value the traveling longer distances over your own life?

Grover Cleveland

2/1/2011 08:56:27 pm

In response to Francis Jehl I believe you fallen for a common misconception. Cheaper does not always mean lower quality. AC power is higher quality than DC. It has better voltage and can reliably run without the use of multiple power plants.

Grover Cleveland

2/1/2011 09:07:37 pm

• Nikola Tesla, I agree wholly with you. Niagara falls produces massive amounts of AC power that would take tons of coal to match. In fact, with AC power we could ease off our dependency on coal, which is a nonrenewable resource. This would help ensure a better generation by creating less pollution. • In response to “Bubba”, I wonder why you are so concerned with pollution yet you choose DC power which needs power plants to generate the power. These power plants produce tons of pollution into our air, so if you really want save Mother Earth go with AC power. • I feel just the same way Bob Bobby. AC is just more efficient than DC power: it is stronger, it is cheaper, and it is cleaner. • Frank Bell, I feel that you have a wonderful idea that is low cost, generates jobs, and is totally beneficial to Nevada and the U.S., and that this idea would be spoiled by DC power. AC power is not only better for electricity usage but also can generate income and beef up our economy. • Mr. Thomas Edison • Forgot to mention Bubba that yes you would run out of coal eventually because it is non renewable. That means it takes a long time for it to renew. If DC power would become the main power source it would take massive amounts of coal to generate, amounts of coal that keep getting bigger, and what happens when you can’t supply that much coal. Disaster. • In response to Francis Jehl, just to let you know, it does not take much over 100 volts to kill a man, so DC power is equally dangerous with less power. What is the point? • Yeah it does cost more to pay for AC power Mr. McKinley, but all the money DC power makes is going to Mr. Edison or mining companies, both of which give nothing back to country. AC power's cost is due to the fact that the power is generated waterfalls and other fast moving bodies of water. They have to pay the government for use of these. So it may cost more right now, but in the long run it will keep the money in the hands of the people and not the powerful aristocrats. • It really annoys me how you self-righteous apparent do gooders go around spreading propaganda about AC. You users and supporters of DC have the audacity to say that AC will kill the citizens, yet you forget to mention something. That DC has killed people also. Then you say that AC can kill you because it has a higher voltage. Well guess what, both are powerful enough to kill you, so why does it matter that AC is stronger. It's not like it is going to make you deader than DC would. Don't leave out important key details when you are supposed to be telling truth. Remember, tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth. • McKinely, despite your slang I do get what you mean, but what you fail to realize is that powering the generator is not making the water undrinkable, it is just that you are ignorant and have not taken the time to do research on a topic that I know oh so well. Also i would like to add for those of you who have stated that getting rid of AC would close off copper mines and would result in loss of jobs. Well just to let you know AC still uses copper, just less. Another thing Mr. McKinely is that you stated that "It would only cost more because we would have to put different capacitors for the circuits and we would have to convert the entire country which would take time, money, effort, and people." You even admit in your own words that this would require man power, that would open a lot more jobs. Also what is a defibrillator. • Bubba, why don't you stop letting others think for you, because trust me, they do not share your interests. Also i would like to add that by polluting our air we could potentially kill millions instead of just a few hundred. So should we spare a handful only to let their kids and grandchildren die of the poisons in the air, or should we sacrifice a few to save many? • In response to Francis Jehl I believe you fallen for a common misconception. Cheaper does not always mean lower quality. AC power is higher quality than DC. It has better voltage and can reliably run without the use of multiple power plants. • Mr. Edison are you just so arrogant and full of yourself that you ignore everything that I have stated, because if you would have read you would see that DC is equally dangerous as AC.

John Tyler Morgan (LB)

2/3/2011 06:19:46 am

In response to Grover Cleveland- would AC power really be that much cheaper? thousands of people in america are already using dc, and switching would cost lots of time and money. Many coal and copper miners would be out of their jobs, not doing a good job to benefit america. Although the hydroelectric plants would create some job opportunitis, a previous coal or copper miner would have to relocate his whole family hundreds of miles to a job that might not be better than his old one. Would all the trouble AC power would cause really be worth it?

John Tyler Morgan (LB)

2/3/2011 06:23:51 am

in response to Francis Jehl- is safety the only reason people choose DC over AC? if so, then i'm sure enough adaptations will be made over the years to keep AC power just as safe as DC is now. DC can also kill a man, and how would one know if AC shock is more painful? AC is cheaper and more environmentally healthy. Choosing AC and working on it to improve safety could be the best choice for america.

John Tyler Morgan (LB)

2/3/2011 06:29:31 am

To Nikola Tesla- Although AC may have a higher voltage and ability to travel longer distances, i have come to understand that it is not safe. AC has a voltage of around 1,000 volts while DC only has about 100, which is much less likely to kill a person. Keeping DC would also cost less as all the people who already own DC items wouldnt have to switch to AC. DC could be the better choice for america

John Tyler Morgan (LB)

2/3/2011 06:39:21 am

To Bubba Williams- I understand that coal and copper will not be used quite as much in ac as it is in dc, but there is still some being used. AC power will also create lots of jobs because of the new hydroelectric power sources that need to be built and maintained. I believe you will come to understand that AC power can be so much better than DC, because of the environmentally friendly way it can be produced or by how much more sensible it is to use a stronger current that can travel much farther than dc can. Are all the benefits that ac will give to america be ignored by its own citzens? i hope not, reconsider AC

John Tyler Morgan (LB)

2/3/2011 06:45:51 am

Dear Mr. Edison-- I hope that your pride doesn't keep you from seeing the benefits that America would receive from using AC power. AC is much faster, stronger, and can travel much farther than dc can without having a power plant built every two miles. AC is also more environmentally healthy than AC, and the hydroelectric power it uses to work would create many jobs. Don't you see all the things that can make AC better than DC? Or are you blinded by your pride?

John Tyler Morgan (LB)

2/3/2011 06:50:00 am

In response to Bob Bobby-Is AC really better than DC? I wouldn't be too sure. Using AC power would cost America tons of money, so many people would have to switch to AC power from the somewhat already widespread DC. And lots of time and effort would have to be put into the building of hydroelectric power sources. DC is also safer when it comes to voltage, and it would allow coal and copper miners to keep their jobs as well as create new ones for the building of power plants. DC may be the best choice for America

John Tyler Morgan (LB)

2/3/2011 06:54:12 am

Frank Bell- I see your point when it comes to the money America could save, I really do. But when it comes to the safety of our citizens, is money more important than a human life? i should hope not. AC may travel farther, but DC is safe and choosing DC would allow coal and copper miners to keep their jobs as well as make new ones available. DC may also be more beneficial than AC towards america as fewer people would have to spend money to change their power to DC, which is more widespread. Please think about this and decide if the money that would be saved in AC power is really worth all the opportunities that would be lost by turning down DC.

John Tyler Morgan (LB)

2/3/2011 07:06:34 am

Mr. Brimage, I can see that right now AC may look more dangerous than DC, but both of these currents pose a threat to us at this time. Both can kill, i assure you. We can work to make AC safer, but ac has many more benefits than disadvantages. AC is more environmentally healthy, it uses renewable resources like water as opposed to unrenewable resources that dc uses like coal and copper. Many new jobs would also become available at the hydroelectric power sources like Niagra Falls. Don't lose all the things you can gain by turning down AC power

John Tyler Morgan (LB)

2/3/2011 07:17:36 am

In response to William McKinley, Unlike you, i believe that AC may be better than DC. AC is much cheaper, and more environmentally friendly because it uses hydroelectric power which comes from a renewable power source. Many new jobs would become available, and it has a higher voltage so it is more reliable when it comes to power. AC would be able to be spread to small rural farm towns, unlike DC which can only be used in densely populated urban cities. AC power may be the right decision for america.

John Tyler Morgan (LB)

2/3/2011 07:25:04 am

Milton Adams-- I understand that Mr. Edison is a well trusted man, but that doesn't always make him right. AC is stronger than DC, and will make a better impact on america. It has a higher voltage., so it works more easily and with a higher power. AC can be spread to more places, possibly making it a better choice for america.

John Tyler Morgan (LB)

2/3/2011 07:38:52 am

to Elbridge Gerry Lapman- I don't think you realize the opportunity before you, the opportunity to support AC. AC can travel much father distances than DC, and it costs quite a bit less. Although it is dangerous, it is no less dangerous, than DC, which is just as likely to kill a person. I hope you will consider this before deciding where you stand in this conflict. DC is not the best choice for America, how will it benefit anyone but Edison himself?

US Senator John Tyler Morgan (LB)

2/3/2011 07:51:08 am

I have made my decision based on your dialogue and opinions that I have observed. I believe it is safe to say that the United Sates of America should have AC as its electricity power. From my research an your own, I have discovered that AC is cheaper, and more environmentally healthy. It uses hydro-electric power, and many new jobs for the people of America would be available. AC has a higher voltage, so it is more reliable when it comes to power. AC would also allow us to spread electricity to small farm towns, unlike DC. AC is the best choice for me, as well as the citizens of America. This is why I have chosen to vote for AC to become America's power source. I would like to thank Mr. Westerford and Nikola Tesla for making this possible. AC is the better choice for America.

William Brimage (MM)

2/3/2011 10:04:54 am

I am William Brimage, a senator. After long hours of thinking I have decided to choose AC power over DC. I chose AC as the main power we will use for many reasons. AC is not only cheaper, but it is also more ecological. As you can see, AC power uses hydroelectric power, which uses water instead of coal and copper. Coal and copper are non-renewable sources, which pollute a lot. It has come to my concern that people in mines will not be able to work that well with AC power. But I know that it is possible to work the mines with AC power. This will mean they can all keep their jobs. I have also noticed that AC can be very dangerous but, DC is not safe either, and we are going to fix that problem by burring wires underground to make AC safer. The prices for AC are, as I mentioned before, much less. You may not notice it in small amounts but when it comes to bigger ones it is a big change. With price also comes another problem; our country now is mostly powered with DC power. What that means is that it will be expensive to change all of the DC power to AC, but if we stay with DC it will be more expensive throughout the years than it will be to change it all to AC. Also, DC cant travel long distances like AC can that means we will not need to put of power plants one very close from another, as we would need to at with DC power. I also know that are country is mostly powered with DC power and yes I know it will be expensive to change all of it for DC power, but if we stay with DC it will be more expensive over the long term than to change it right know. As in summery I believe I made the right choice in choosing AC for the main source of our country’s power. and thanks to Mr. Westerford and Tesla this is possible.

Elbridge Gerry Lapnam(JM)

2/3/2011 12:23:41 pm

After carefully looking over all of the responses and opinions, I, Elbridge Gerry Lapnam have decided that DC is better for the country than AC. AC uses coal and copper as the main power source, which would increase the amount of job opportunities and economy. Even though the voltage is low it remains constant. DC not being able to travel farther than AC, there would have to be more stations set up with increases jobs. DC will cost less than AC because of our country is already using DC so it would not be a dramatic change for America. The idea changing my mind and driving it towards DC would be that it is much safer. In America isn't it all about the people? I believe that safety is the huge idea of deciding. In the end, I, Elbridge Gerry Lapnam cast my vote to DC. Thank you both sides for creating AC and DC.

Period 3

Leave a Reply.

Author

Archives

Categories