UK diy (uk.d-i-y) For the discussion of all topics related to diy (do-it-yourself) in the UK. All levels of experience and proficency are welcome to join in to ask questions or offer solutions.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #61   Report Post  
Old April 21st 17, 01:01 PM posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by DIYBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 30,823
Default New Woodburner Regulations

In article ,
Andy Burns wrote:
RJH wrote:


Andy Burns wrote:

Are you suggesting that saving a few hundred watts for a few minutes
per month is distinguishable from noise in the 2750 TWh EU
electricity budget?


Most households have a vacuum - so you have to multiply your 'few
hundred watts' by at least twenty million for the UK to begin to
understand potential savings. And then multiply that figure by 27.


Even if all 220 million EU households bought a new vacuum that used 400W
less than their old one and used it for 2 hours a month, it would still
be 2749.8 TWh


So even less point having a light bulb that saves 40 watts?

And you seem to be making the common mistake that people are being forced
to rush out and buy a more efficient vacuum, which they're not. So why are
you so against them having a more efficient one available when they do
need a replacement?

Mind, the 'few minutes' does suggest interesting priorities :-)


Absolutely!


--
*Be more or less specific *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

  #62   Report Post  
Old April 21st 17, 01:12 PM posted to uk.d-i-y
NY NY is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by DIYBanter: Aug 2013
Posts: 807
Default New Woodburner Regulations

"Capitol" wrote in message
o.uk...
Andy Burns wrote:
Dave Plowman wrote:

I'd suggest to read up about the reasons behind such legislation. Rather
than making up your own.


Are you suggesting that saving a few hundred watts for a few minutes per
month is distinguishable from noise in the 2750 TWh EU electricity
budget?

I'd even agree that lighting is a worthwhile target, but that maybe they
pushed it a few years too early, how many subsidised CFLs lurk in the
backs of cupboards when decent LEDs were only a few years down the track?


I'd always judged LED lamps by the GU10 spotlights that we bought to replace
the tungsten ones in our bathroom and in the kitchen light fitting. They
tend to produce dimmer lighting and in a more restricted angle - definitely
not as good as 60W tungsten bulbs.

Then we bought a few Philips Hue lights. Leaving aside the fact that they
can be adjusted to various colours (we'd probably buy fixed-colour ones when
it came to replace the daylight CFLs that we have through the house) they
are very bright - most impressive. I'm not sure what the equivalent tungsten
wattage is, but I'd estimate somewhere between the equivalent of 60W and
100W, while using 7W of power.

It's a shame that a lot of the smaller bulbs (eg candle) are only available
in screw fittings, which means using a bayonet to screw adaptor (increasing
the length) in an existing light fitting, or else finding a matching screw
fitting that can replace the bayonet ones in a light cluster fitting.

  #63   Report Post  
Old April 21st 17, 01:15 PM posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by DIYBanter: Apr 2009
Posts: 28,297
Default New Woodburner Regulations

On 21/04/17 12:31, Capitol wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
The Other Mike wrote:
On Thu, 20 Apr 2017 11:16:35 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"

wrote:


Old kit becomes obsolescent naturally. Anyone still using a 405 line
VHF
TV? No? Was that because of the EU?


Indirectly it was, the Krauts invented PAL, we managed perfectly well
with black and white tv's.


PAL was developed at the request of the European Broadcast Union. The
previous colour TV system, NTSC, had undergone extensive trials by the
BBC
etc and been found lacking.

There's an obvious reason why a German maker spent large sums developing
PAL as a European standard (incidentally first used in the UK, before
Germany) and that was they actually invested in industry, unlike the UK
which preferred to pay out as much as possible to shareholders. Hence
there being no UK owned electronics company these days, while the
descendants of Telefunken are still going strong.


Whilst basically I agree with you, you must bear in mind that UK
insurance companies own vast holdings of world wide shares. In that
respect, private companies are much better at investing than most public
ones. The normal sign of doom is purchase of a company by a hedge fund.
The result is normally a shell with no assets. cf BHS, Little Chef and
now Debenhams.


Ogh god, its 'Red Dave' whinging on about capitalists.

Howes the German jet engine business doing Dave?
When did you last buy a German camera?
What computers are designed in Germany Dave?
What chips are still designed in Germany Dave?

I don't want to live in a ****ry that makes only cars and windmills and
washing machines, frankly.





--
The theory of Communism may be summed up in one sentence: Abolish all
private property.

Karl Marx

  #64   Report Post  
Old April 21st 17, 01:18 PM posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by DIYBanter: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,193
Default New Woodburner Regulations

On 21/04/2017 12:23, NY wrote:
"Andy Burns" wrote in message
...
Even if all 220 million EU households bought a new vacuum that used
400W less than their old one and used it for 2 hours a month, it would
still be 2749.8 TWh


But *would* it still be for 2 hours a month. If you simply reduce the
motor power, without making that motor power produce more suction, all
you are doing is meaning that the device has to be left on longer to do
the same amount of work, because you have to keep going over the bits
that a stronger suction would have picked up first time.


Possibly - bit like an electric shower. But/and a fair bit of time -
when doing stairs for example - it isn't doing anything except making a
noise (unless you switch off between steps).

It's the same with kettles. It takes a fixed amount of energy to boil a
given amount of water, so if you reduce the power, the kettle must be
left on longer to boil that water - no saving of energy and certainly no
saving of time (quite the reverse).


No, kettles are pretty much 100% efficient. A hoover is nothing like
that - witness the noise for a start. 3kW kettles are a wonderful thing.

Better to encourage people to heat less water - don't boil a full kettle
if your teapot only holds half a kettle-full. Or else encourage people
to use the remaining hot water as part of the washing-up water.


Agreed. I don't use hot water much - household cleaning and very grubby
mitts. Most of the time cold does me fine.

--
Cheers, Rob
  #65   Report Post  
Old April 21st 17, 01:18 PM posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by DIYBanter: Apr 2009
Posts: 28,297
Default New Woodburner Regulations

On 21/04/17 12:45, Capitol wrote:
Andy Burns wrote:
Dave Plowman wrote:

I'd suggest to read up about the reasons behind such legislation. Rather
than making up your own.


Are you suggesting that saving a few hundred watts for a few minutes per
month is distinguishable from noise in the 2750 TWh EU electricity
budget?

I'd even agree that lighting is a worthwhile target, but that maybe they
pushed it a few years too early, how many subsidised CFLs lurk in the
backs of cupboards when decent LEDs were only a few years down the track?


Hindsight is a wonderful thing. More to the point, why should we
reduce energy consumption?


because energy comes at a price.

That's how the market used to work. If e.g. LED lightbulbs cost less
over the bulb lifetime than filament, you would buy LED.

But because the Lefty****s didn't get the ideological result they wanted
out of the free market, they turned it into a subsidy market, where
legislation and taxation dictated what you bought instead.


--
The theory of Communism may be summed up in one sentence: Abolish all
private property.

Karl Marx



  #66   Report Post  
Old April 21st 17, 01:19 PM posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by DIYBanter: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,193
Default New Woodburner Regulations

On 21/04/2017 12:45, Capitol wrote:
Andy Burns wrote:
Dave Plowman wrote:

I'd suggest to read up about the reasons behind such legislation. Rather
than making up your own.


Are you suggesting that saving a few hundred watts for a few minutes per
month is distinguishable from noise in the 2750 TWh EU electricity
budget?

I'd even agree that lighting is a worthwhile target, but that maybe they
pushed it a few years too early, how many subsidised CFLs lurk in the
backs of cupboards when decent LEDs were only a few years down the track?


Hindsight is a wonderful thing. More to the point, why should we
reduce energy consumption?


More to the point - why consume it in the first place?

--
Cheers, Rob
  #67   Report Post  
Old April 21st 17, 01:36 PM posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by DIYBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 30,823
Default New Woodburner Regulations

In article ,
NY wrote:
"Andy Burns" wrote in message
...
Even if all 220 million EU households bought a new vacuum that used
400W less than their old one and used it for 2 hours a month, it
would still be 2749.8 TWh


But *would* it still be for 2 hours a month. If you simply reduce the
motor power, without making that motor power produce more suction, all
you are doing is meaning that the device has to be left on longer to do
the same amount of work, because you have to keep going over the bits
that a stronger suction would have picked up first time.


If you followed the discussions when this reduction in maximum vacuum
cleaner power was proposed, you'd know that it *was* possible to reduce
that power consumption without effecting the amount of 'suck' by better
design. Indeed, Dyson wanted a lower limit than the one settled on.

It's the same with kettles. It takes a fixed amount of energy to boil a
given amount of water, so if you reduce the power, the kettle must be
left on longer to boil that water - no saving of energy and certainly
no saving of time (quite the reverse).


It's not the same with a kettle or many other heating devices. Near enough
100% of the energy used goes into heating the water. Unlike a vacuum
cleaner which produces noise, vibration and heat as well as suction.

Better to encourage people to heat less water - don't boil a full kettle
if your teapot only holds half a kettle-full. Or else encourage people
to use the remaining hot water as part of the washing-up water.


You can encourage people to do anything, and they can choose to ignore
you. Requiring a new device to have a certain level of efficiency removes
them being able to ignore that.

--
*Corduroy pillows are making headlines.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
  #68   Report Post  
Old April 21st 17, 01:38 PM posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by DIYBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 30,823
Default New Woodburner Regulations

In article ,
Andy Burns wrote:
Capitol wrote:


Some of my CFLs are 30years old. The modern CFLs die like flies IME.


Some of mine are close to that, they have been relegated to the loft
though ...



Just why do so many put these dim energy saving bulbs where they are
rarely used? So not only don't save any appreciable energy, but present a
safety hazard too?

--
*What was the best thing before sliced bread?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
  #69   Report Post  
Old April 21st 17, 01:57 PM posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by DIYBanter: Aug 2015
Posts: 1,850
Default New Woodburner Regulations

RJH wrote:
On 21/04/2017 12:45, Capitol wrote:
Andy Burns wrote:
Dave Plowman wrote:

I'd suggest to read up about the reasons behind such legislation.
Rather
than making up your own.

Are you suggesting that saving a few hundred watts for a few minutes per
month is distinguishable from noise in the 2750 TWh EU electricity
budget?

I'd even agree that lighting is a worthwhile target, but that maybe they
pushed it a few years too early, how many subsidised CFLs lurk in the
backs of cupboards when decent LEDs were only a few years down the
track?


Hindsight is a wonderful thing. More to the point, why should we
reduce energy consumption?


More to the point - why consume it in the first place?


You have avoided the question with an opinion.
  #70   Report Post  
Old April 21st 17, 02:00 PM posted to uk.d-i-y
NY NY is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by DIYBanter: Aug 2013
Posts: 807
Default New Woodburner Regulations

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
Better to encourage people to heat less water - don't boil a full kettle
if your teapot only holds half a kettle-full. Or else encourage people
to use the remaining hot water as part of the washing-up water.


You can encourage people to do anything, and they can choose to ignore
you. Requiring a new device to have a certain level of efficiency removes
them being able to ignore that.


True, but it also encourages people to hang onto a less efficient appliance
which may use more energy but also has more of the end result that people
buy it for.

For example if an older 1000W vac has better suction that a modern 500W
(even though the modern one has better "suck per watt" performance) would
you get rid of the old one or would you strive to keep it running because it
does the job better, even though it costs more to run?

Likewise for light bulbs: tungsten ones tend to be smaller than LED or CFL
ones of comparable brightness, and tend to have wider field of coverage (for
GU10 spots) and reach full brightness much quicker than some CFLs. We have a
light fitting in the kitchen which has 5 GU10 sockets. With tungstens, that
lit the work surfaces much better than with LED replacements, so we might
have to replace the fitting with one that takes seven, eight or nine bulbs
to get the same brightness and fewer pools of darkness between one bulb and
the next.



Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Woodburner glass newshound UK diy 4 January 4th 16 02:45 PM
WD40 in a woodburner Part Timer UK diy 35 October 25th 15 09:08 PM
Installing a woodburner puffernutter[_2_] UK diy 32 February 4th 14 12:02 AM
Woodburner Gurus Dave Liquorice[_2_] UK diy 23 January 15th 13 05:14 PM
gas fire that looks like a woodburner vbleau UK diy 5 January 27th 09 07:07 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:42 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2017 DIYbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about DIY & home improvement"

 

Copyright © 2017