|
Posted by Red Green on November 24, 2008, 10:54 pm
>> On Sat, 22 Nov 2008 16:40:02 -0800, "Bill"
>> >This thread has seemed to hit a nerve!
>> >Why are so many people getting upset that I am working to eliminate
>> >"vam
> pire
>> >loads" in my house and reduce my electric bill?
>> >Anyway here are the facts about "vampire power" for those who are
>> >intere
> sted
>> >in this (can be 5% of your electric bill and 75% of the power for
>> >electr
> onic
>> >things is used while the devices are turned off!)....
>> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standby_power
>> Please do not confuse Wikipedia for facts. As to that 75% number, it
>> is highly suspect.
>> Again, a simple cost/benefit analysis would show the best path to
>> follow. However, simple math is beyond many people who blindly follow
>> whatever the current fad is (be it global warming, electric cars, or
>> whatever) in an attempt to appear 'on top of things', and 'all wise'.
>> In the end, sure you can save a few penny's of electricity, and spend
>> dollars doing so. And perhaps you feel good doing it that way. Fine,
>> it's your house, as long as no one else gets hurt, go for it. But, if
>> you are really interested in saving money (or energy) then I'd
>> recommend thinking about what you are doing, looking at real numbers,
>> analyzing the various factors (including items such as startup
>> current) and seeing what is the real best solution.
>
> Exactly. What interested people here I think was the the fallacy and
> futility of worrying about a minuscule amount of wasted energy;
> equivalent perhaps to the home heat lost during time taken to have the
> front door open on a cold day to bring in a few bags of groceries!
>
> It's heartening though that in this day and age of wasteful and
> prodigal monster homes, jacuzzi and swimming pool styles of living,
> V8 Hummers etc. (A situation possibly being currently amended by
> 'tightening our belts'?) is that there is awareness and interest in
> WHAT IS WORTH DOING to conserve.
>
> What seems to escape many is that by spending many dollars to use
> manufactured items one only saves a few cents worth of energy. All
> manufactured items require resources and energy to manufacture. For
> example how much elctrcity is required say, to refine iron ore, make
> galvanized sheet steel and stamp out an electrical outlet box, along
> with the energy required to run the factory in which it is made,
> package it, transport it to a local retail outlet, stock the shelves,
> buy or have screws to mount, bring it home, etc. etc. ??????
>
> A neighbour (driven by a wife with virtually zero technical
> appreciation) has gone all CFLs. Even for those locations where lights
> are only used occasionally. Each CFL costs around $3 compared to the
> 25 cent el-cheapos I use and requires several manufacturing operations
> involving electronic components and a very small amount of mercury.
> But their electricity consumption has changed little.
>
> Why? Because they like most here they use electrcity for heating. So
> any waste heat from 'inefficient' old fashioned incandescent light
> bulbs does not contribute to warming the home; likewise an
> 'inefficient' fridge etc. lost heat from an electric hot water tank
> etc.
>
> One item that does waste heat energy is a clothes dryer; it just
> chucks warm damp air outside for some 20 to 30 minutes each time it is
> run. Hey must cost that out! We run ours as little as possible and
> whenver weather allows dry heavy items, blankets, towels etc. on our
> two cothes lines. See item on clothe line supports.
>
> Cheers.
I've frequently thought about how stupid it is that in the winter we heat
homes, have this box inside that takes that heated air and makes it cold
and loses that cold because of the heated air around it that used to be
cold air.
Probably cost a fortune to make refrigs that could use piped in air from
outside. And the further south you are the longer the ROI breakeven.
| 
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap