On 22/02/2019 11:21, RJH wrote:
On 22/02/2019 10:18, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 22/02/2019 08:24, 2987fr wrote:
"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 21/02/2019 21:42, charles wrote:
In article , NY
wrote:
"ARW" wrote in message
...
On 21/02/2019 14:28, NY wrote:
And you have to "sell" the idea that it will be more expensive to
install, and maybe to run, and (according to the article) will take
longer to heat up a room - presumably because it is lower power.
That's a hell of an advertising and PR campaign that you are
going to
need :-)
Something like..
"It's not lower powered, it's more efficient."
That's almost as bad as the low-powered vacuum cleaners which don't
produce enough suction so you have to keep going over the same bit of
carpet, or lower-powered kettles which take longer to heat the
water...
but the legislators can't see further than "it uses less power".
The kettle thing is particularly short-sighted because it takes a
fixed
amount of energy to heat a fixed amount of water: it is irrelevant
whether it's 3 kW for 2 minutes or 1.5 kW for 4 minutes - the
amount of
energy used is the same.
but you might get more radiation losses with the longer time?
you WILL get more radiation losses...
But not enough to matter. But its far from clear that half power
kettles are worth it.
Its clear that they are not.
I had a freind who got extremely upset if I filled his kettle more
than necessary to make a cuppa.
Good.
Let's look at the numbers.
OK :-)
A pint is what? 450ml? So maybe I added an extra half pint of cold at
let's say 10C.Â* 225ml of water to be raised by 90C.
20.25kcal A staggering 23 Wh.
Lets say I do this 4 times a day 365 times a year.
at 20p a unit its over £6!!!!
Times over 20 million households. Costs are not just monetary, or per user.
yeah right. And at least 50% of that is discountable against heating
anyway.
Well yes, in your case, where you need 365.24.7 heating. I accept that
you seem to say you do - most don't.
Average heating bills on a typical house are around 2-3kW CONTINUOUS
averaged out over the year.
That seems to be the total energy consumption - of which, yes, space and
water heating takes up the bulk.
When you do teh sums ist pretty celar waht is genuine energu savings
(insulation, heat pumps, running the house a bit cooler) and what is
utter ******** virtue signalling designed to sell product (kettles and
hoovers, diesel cars etc etc).
How can you expect anybody to take you seriously with that type of
reasoning? Any energy saving is a saving. Wasting energy is wasting
energy. Not difficult.
A lot of 'energy saving' does NOT save energy. It causes it to be spent
elewhere..
For eaxample if - say - we mandated that it was illegal to USE a 3KW
kettle, the energy to manufacture new ones would add to the extra energy
lost because of the longer period of heatloss from the kettle.
Therefrore its easy to see that 'energy saving' low power kettles would
actually increase energy consumption.
It is similar with solar panels... total EROEI is very small.
--
€œThe ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly is to
fill the world with fools.€
Herbert Spencer