Re: Digital Tools Help Users Save Energy, Study Finds

["Robert Green" <ROBERT_GREEN1963@xxxxxxxxx>]

"Bill Kearney" <wkearney99@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:c6idnTw_P7bWPBfanZ2dnUVZ_qGknZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > I still firmly believe that if the problem is coming OUT of power plant
> > smokestacks, that's where it should be controlled.
>
> I agree, better efforts put into controlling pollution from power plants
is
> certainly VERY important.

I am wary of carbon credits and "greenwash"

http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/11/30/six-sins-of-greenwashing-a-prim
er/

and fighting mercury at the stack with mercury in consumer products.  I
think we can do better with either enhanced incandescents or LEDs.  That's
why I favor the "at the stack" solution, although the power companies
certainly don't.  No matter what light source emerges as the conservation
champion, we MUST clean the stack exhaust, no matter what the cost.  I just
want to make sure all the contenders in the consumer lighting contest get a
fair shot, especially the ones that don't have the mercury problem of CFLs.

> But it's no replacement for putting effort into consumer-side energy
savings
> too.  Neither is worth doing alone.  And please, let's not have this
devolve
> into another STUPID thread complaining about CFLs.

Unfortunately, it's hard to avoid CFLs in an energy-saving thread, but it
doesn't have be a devolved one.  I just bought 8 N:Vision 14W bulbs on
special sale for $4.  That means that my objection on price has lost a lot
of merit.  Things change, opinions can change, too.  That comes from a
meaningful dialog, something I know that virtually everyone here in CHA is
capable of if they exercise just a tiny bit of self-control.  I learned
about N:Vision here in CHA and it was a positive discovery.

The major problem facing CHA, as I see it, is that it devolves into personal
attacks far too readily.  It's fair to question someone's statement but it
should be done by posting controverting information, not calling someone
else the equivalent of a pathological liar or fool.

I still don't get the life I expect from CFLs, and I don't like the slow
warm-up or the X-10 issues, but I do like saving money and the CFL bulbs do
that.  Plus, I no longer burn my arm on the stinking bedside lamp!  The
savings make it worthwhile, to me, to spend money on XTB boosters and X-10
filters to mitigate the X-10 problems.

I'm glad that most (but sadly not all) X-10/CFL problems have solutions.   I
would love to solve the "flashes after shutdown" and "needs a neutral"
problems that still vex me.  I just hope that they'll solve the
temperature/slow warm up problem eventually.

I'm also not worried about my recycling the bulbs, but my frequent trips
along the 200 mile garbage dump that is the Amtrak RR DC to NYC right-of-way
makes me worry about where the bulbs will end up.  I think they need to have
a deposit of about a quarter to make sure they find their way to a recycling
center *intact* (no $ for busted bulbs).  I hope that's not a devolution -
just a part of the overall problem.  When the number of bulbs appearing at
recycling centers approaches 75% of the bulbs sold, I'll be more sanguine
about CFLs.

> I'd much rather see better power plant pollution controls, better
electrical
> distribution and more use of electricty (or hydrogen) in the cars
> themselves.  It only seems logical to concentrate pollution reduction at
the
> source instead of trying to graft it onto the vehicles.    Better
electrical
> distribution from cleaner sources used to create hydrogen locally would
> certainly go a long way to put a dent in hydrocarbon use in vehicles.

You sound old enough to remember what it was like to stand near a circa 1960
V-8 car exhaust.  You would pass out from the fumes in very short order.
Now you can stand next to some cars and not even know they are running
except for the radiated heat.  We need to accomplish that same process with
electrical power plants.  US Big Auto complained bitterly that car exhaust
was inherently dirty and was impossible to clean economically.  And then
Japan's automakers, especially Honda, turned that belief on its head.  This
is a doable problem.  It just needs doing.

> Meanwhile I'd certainly like to have a more convenient way to plan my
major
> appliance use of electric in ways that'd a) save me money and b) cut down
on
> peak loads.  Give me a widget on the wall in the laundry room that tells
me
> when it's most effective to run the wash and I'd buy it.

I'd like to know what other people are using to monitor power use?  I tried
using a photoelectric pulse counter aimed at the meter's rotating disk but
the power company left me a door tag explaining why they removed it.
(Customer attached equipment prohibited)  (-:   I'd imagine that now the way
to go is to ask for a reporting meter that had some sort of output for
consumption data.  I'll see what my local power company says when I call
them this week to ask.   I believe the report cited in the article is
correct.  Knowing how much juice a house is using is an essential step in
achieving conservation.

--
Bobby G.