upflying Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 More "only in Kalifornia" government control. Make sure you unplug your Dustbuster, iPhone, Batterytender and Chevy Volt from the wall or your state will be next. http://www.contracostatimes.com/ci_19722712?IADID=Search-www.contracostatimes.com-www.contracostatimes.com Link to comment
moshe_levy Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 Bob, the Volt doesn't overcharge its battery - the charger is "smart" like the one we use on our bikes. To quote from your article: "California has a long history of adopting efficiency standards for appliances like refrigerators, air conditioners, clothes dryers and televisions that other states have followed. Those regulations have helped make California the most energy-efficient state in the nation. A report released this month by the nonprofit Institute for Electric Efficiency found that while California has 12.1 percent of the nation's population, it used only 6.9 percent of the nation's electricity in 2011." Sounds terrible, just terrible. I don't know how you guys live with such horrific intrusion into your lives which leads to these disgusting increases in efficiency. Reducing waste is just SO passe! -MKL Link to comment
MT Wallet Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 "Sounds terrible, just terrible. I don't know how you guys live with such horrific intrusion into your lives which leads to these disgusting increases in efficiency. Reducing waste is just SO passe!" Can I have a 1st class ticket on that guilt trip. Just make sure its printed on recycled paper and printed on a hand powered printing press. Link to comment
tallman Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 Depends. this source sez Mass. is #1. Sort of reinforces the notion that liberals are full of hot air and need less energy to warm the rooms. Florida is #1 in average temperature and 27th in energy efficiency. AC takes a lot of energy. I wonder... Link to comment
Mike Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 Tim, your graphic is all messed up. Can you re-post? Link to comment
Joe Frickin' Friday Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 To quote from your article: "...Those regulations have helped make California the most energy-efficient state in the nation. A report released this month by the nonprofit Institute for Electric Efficiency found that while California has 12.1 percent of the nation's population, it used only 6.9 percent of the nation's electricity in 2011." "Efficiency" is not the right word here. Efficiency is energy (mechanical or otherwise) output of a device divided by energy input. An electric motor that takes 1 horsepower of electricity in and provides 0.9 shaft horsepower (and 0.1 horsepower of waste heat) is 90% efficienct. "Energy use per capita" is the figure they are dealing with, and as Tim points out, that can vary widely from state to state for reasons other than efficiency. States that get smokin' hot in the summertime are going to use lots of electricity for air conditioning. California probably gets a break on this because its most populous cities are close to the coast, where the ocean tends to keep the climate cooler. Compare San Diego against, say, Houston. San Diego: Houston: Link to comment
moshe_levy Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 Good point, Mitch. How can we move this to an apples to apples comparison, though? Surely Houston is hotter than San Diego. But let's say for argument's sake that CA places a minimum of say, 16SEER on ACs (again, this is just argument, I have no idea what the real figures are) and TX has a low limit, say 10SEER. So now the biggest electrical consumer in the hotter house is sucking down much more energy than the more efficient AC in the cooler San Diego house. Skews things even further. Can we ever get to an apples to apples comparo, or can that only be done by comparing appliances say, in the same geographical area? -MKL Link to comment
moshe_levy Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 PS: FWIW I have been tracking my own use since I put up my solar panels. I switched over to high-efficiency ACs (from 10 year old 10SEER to brand new, 18SEER) and high-efficiency furnace (from 10 year old 80% efficienct to new 95% efficient). In point of fact, my energy use during summer months has been more than halved, and so far winter heating bills are about 20% less, though that could be the result of the very mild winter we've been having. My overall point is that high efficiency (major) consumers of power in your home make a major dent in the energy bills - especially in the case of AC. -MKL Link to comment
tallman Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 Tim, your graphic is all messed up. Can you re-post? Massachusetts Is The Most Energy Efficient State | According to the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, Massachusetts has edged out California as the most energy efficient state, with scores of 45.5 and 44 out of 50 on ACEEE’s rankings. The council used six criteria to score each state: utility and public benefits programs and policies, transportation policies, building energy codes, combined heat and power, state government initiatives, and appliance efficiency standards. New York came in third. Out of the 50 states and District of Columbia, North Dakota was the least energy efficient state. Looking at the criteria, public policy is part of the equation. So apples to apples, not likely, IMO. Link to comment
OoPEZoO Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 More "only in Kalifornia" government control. Make sure you unplug your Dustbuster, iPhone, Batterytender and Chevy Volt from the wall or your state will be next. http://www.contracostatimes.com/ci_19722712?IADID=Search-www.contracostatimes.com-www.contracostatimes.com Bob, the Volt doesn't overcharge its battery - the charger is "smart" like the one we use on our bikes. No worries for the Dustbusters either.....as long as it is a newer LiIon model and not an old NiCad unit. I should know, I designed the charging circuit and layed out the circuit boards Link to comment
moshe_levy Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 I, for one, would truly like to back up to square 1, and ask what the issue is. Bob, what is inherently offensive to you about this issue? I am genuinely curious. I for one see a high efficiency appliance and inside, I am happy that less energy is being wasted when not in use, and when in use. I see no functional, political, moral, or environmental benefit to an appliance which uses more energy for no apparent net benefit. I am at a loss as to why that position is so offensive to some people. Can you explain this? If it's not "the idea" of efficiency but rather than it's being imposed through regulation, can you clarify that point? Because there, too, there are net benefits that maybe you're not taking into account, and it would be a good discussion to bring those up. -MKL Link to comment
upflying Posted January 12, 2012 Author Share Posted January 12, 2012 I, for one, would truly like to back up to square 1, and ask what the issue is. Bob, what is inherently offensive to you about this issue? I am genuinely curious. I for one see a high efficiency appliance and inside, I am happy that less energy is being wasted when not in use, and when in use. I see no functional, political, moral, or environmental benefit to an appliance which uses more energy for no apparent net benefit. I am at a loss as to why that position is so offensive to some people. Can you explain this? If it's not "the idea" of efficiency but rather than it's being imposed through regulation, can you clarify that point? Because there, too, there are net benefits that maybe you're not taking into account, and it would be a good discussion to bring those up. -MKL It's offensive because I was led to believe recharging batteries was "green" and keeps me from having to dispose of my D-cell Ray-O-Vac's in the landfill, er, a, excuse me, sanitary recycling facility. It's offensive because as Ca adopts "smart" chargers, the additional cost of manufacturing the charging units will be passed along to the consumer. It's offensive and hypocritical to accept efficiency as being more expensive. Efficient means cheaper doesn't it? Link to comment
OoPEZoO Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 Truse me......its better for everyONE and everyTHING for the move to "smart" chargers. The cost is slightly more, but the benefits heavily outweigh the single negative of cost. The batteries last longer, can be charged faster, use less electricity in the long run, and are just a better design overall. An old NiCad charger would pump current into a battery 24/7 even if it was fully charged. Once fully charged, the battery would dissipate the extra energy as heat. This is why old batteries get hot as hell when left on the charger for long lengths of time. This degrades the battery and eventually basically cooks it. In some cases, the batteries basically turn into resistors and they sit there just sucking electricity through your meter. It is extremely inefficiant, and a monumental waste of energy. The industry got away with it because NiCad batterys are considered "safe". They were not good designs, they are cheap crap. The new designs monitor the charging and battery voltage and terminate the charge once the battery is filled to capacity. It then goes into a monitoring mode or goes to sleep depending on the design. Either way, the current draw drops to a fraction of what it is during the charge cycle. It extends the overall life of the battery substantially, uses less electricity, and is better from every aspect. Link to comment
moshe_levy Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 What Keith said re battery charging technology is precisely correct. Would you leave your faucet running all day and occasionally walk over with a cup to fill, or does it make more sense to turn the faucet on when you've got your cup under the tap? Same exact argument here. More points: >>>It's offensive because I was led to believe recharging batteries was "green" and keeps me from having to dispose of my D-cell Ray-O-Vac's in the landfill, er, a, excuse me, sanitary recycling facility.<<<< Of course recharging batteries is better than disposing of them. And now instead of charging all the time when 90% of the time you don't need to, you will be running a more efficient system. It's called progress, like computers instead of an abacus. Why is this offensive again? >>>It's offensive because as Ca adopts "smart" chargers, the additional cost of manufacturing the charging units will be passed along to the consumer.<<<< Correct. And likewise, the consumer will benefit from the vastly reduced energy usage for that said charger over its useful lifespan since it now only charges when it needs to. Why is this offensive again? >>>>It's offensive and hypocritical to accept efficiency as being more expensive. Efficient means cheaper doesn't it?<<<< Efficiency means, as mitch said, getting an output out of a machine or a system that loses as little as possible from its input. That means it's cheaper to run. It doesn't mean it's cheaper to buy, because obviously more efficient machines or systems are using higher levels of technology which, by definition, is more expensive to produce, and therefore to buy. What's more expensive, a high efficiency air conditioner, or a lower one? A car, or the hybrid version of that car? And so on. This is obvious, and not offensive in any sense. The issue if you judge it purely on economics is: Is the higher up front cost of a more efficient machine recoverable over what period of time via its lower running costs? I can tell you here Bob, with my rudimentary understanding of electronics, that a smart charger costs fractions of a penny more to manufacture than a dumb one, and surely will more than make up for that extra cost over its life, many times over. There's nothing offensive about that, I take it? Again, my central point here is why people are offended by progress, by efficiency, by technology? There is something there to explore and understand. This goes beyond politics into psychology and the ability of a segment of the population to literally fear innocuous things or events as infringing on the core of their lives. -MKL Link to comment
leikam Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 I, for one, welcome our new rechargeable overlords. Link to comment
CoarsegoldKid Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 I for one thought when I heard the story on the radio that Bob was going to blow a gasket. He did. I also think this is good progress. Link to comment
RonStewart Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 So, Joe, are we to take Bob blowing a gasket as an indicator of good progress? (kidding) I finally saw the 1936 Paramount movie "Things to Come" on TCM recently. Progress - and people's reaction to it - was a central theme. We don't hear that word, "progress," said in breathless glowing tones, like we used to. Link to comment
upflying Posted January 12, 2012 Author Share Posted January 12, 2012 "Hello, is this the State of California Battery Charger Efficiency Bureau?" "Press 1 for English.." "Yes, I have a pacemaker battery that needs recharging, can you recommend one for me?" "Press 5 if you have a cordless lawnmower or tooth brush" "Press 6 if you have a cordless drill.. "Press 7 if you need a hearing aid battery and must use TTY now" "Press 8 if you need emergency medical services" ...dial tone Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.