Re: Power Supplies, Saving Money, and switching vs. Linear?

["Robert Green" <ROBERT_GREEN1963@xxxxxxxxx>]

At the risk of getting both parties pissed at me, may I suggest that we all
step back and take a breath?

My best guess, although probably wrong, is that Dave was reacting to
perceived criticism of his choice to use a regulated PS for his new project.
If I recall, it was the most cost-effective solution.  Since Dave's new
devices will all be run 24x7, there's really nothing to be gained from using
a switch mode power supply.   I think, as so often happens, that the thread
migrated to solar power and energy conservation in general so it seemed that
we were still discussing Dave's power supply choice when in fact we were
talking about reducing energy consumption across the board.

Please, either side, correct me if I am wrong.

I also think Dave was making the point that it's pointless to pee in the
dark to save $.0004 worth of juice when Exxon tankers drop entire shiploads
of oil on the Alaskan shores and major power plants are excused from
reducing their power plant CO emissions.

ELD, I believe, correctly countered that every little bit helps or hurts, so
we have to think locally as well as globally.  While it's way off topic for
CHA, *I* think we may eventually prove that capitalism can't survive in its
present form of caring only what stock market cares about on a very short
term basis.  There's no real room in that model to account for greenhouse
gases or environmental protection or any kind of realistic long term
planning.

Personally, I'm betting on a surprise ending for civilization, like the
collapse of the earth's crust from pumping out all that oil.   :-)

--
Bobby G.