On 02/05/13 06:10, harry wrote:
On May 1, 7:01 pm, Tim Streater wrote:
In article
,









harry wrote:
On May 1, 9:52 am, Tim Streater wrote:
In article
,
harry wrote:
If each appliance is fitted with a "smart device", then no changes are
needed to the home wiring.
I would have thought is better to have "essential" and
"non-essential" circuits in every house.
And you think the teenagers are going to remember which socket to plug
something in to? Or the average person, come to that.
You think anyone is going to convert their existing house to that - put
all your furniture in storage, move out, have all the walls bashed
around to have a second set of cabling installed, replaster, complete
redecoration, move back in.
Dream on.
You are a very ignorant person.
This has been done for years in hospitals because the emergency
generators are often not large enough to meet the full load.
Essential sockets are usually red.
In acute wards, there are no non-essential sockets.
Most essential equipment is permanently connected anyway.
I wasn't talking about commercial property, now was I? I was talking
about domestic.

We are talking about what might be done in the future.
Lots of these ideas being put about have been done for years in
commercial/industrial situations.

Eg, the thread on energy efficient pumps.
Which you average local plumber doesn't understand.

Condensing boilers were used commercially for years before they became
the domestic norm.

Heating system controls were used commercially long before domestic
use too.

All this stuff becomes viable domestically as the cost of fuel rises.

Lot of people round here need to get their heads out of their arses.
You actually need a zero energy house.

or alternatively build ****loads of nuclear power stations and make
energy cheap enough so we don't have to spend billions on finding ways
to not use it.


--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.