Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Environmentalist Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Elmer Flugum who wrote (3130)	2/16/2004 9:11:25 AM
From: k.ramesh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 36917

I thought that is why the toilet had a cover! Haven't you heard of - If its yellow let it mellow If its brown flush it down.<g> As for payback periods for the Gravity Film Exchanger, w and w/o plumber. This is the moment we all dread, using our own brains, It depends so much on individual situation. There are places that tell you that heating water can be around 25% of your overall heating needs. If your # of users is larger the payback will be faster. If your current w/h is electric, it will be faster. My own justification will be - My w/h is already close to its full life, I intend to replace it with tankless gas w/h to reduce upto 30% standby losses. In order to help it along - as it is diffcult to raise the temp, in a hurry - (the whole justification for a tank) - I will employ a heat exchanger. Which is why I look to folks like ggcox, who have implemented other ideas to see if it is reasonable, then just do it. You can rationalize it as some people spend money on BMW's, I spend it on future savings. Here is a stab at it. Jan = peak heating month - Gas bill = $200. 25%= $50. Assuming recycling reduction of 30% & 40% = $15 or $20 Assume 10 peak heating months/year as water probably comes into house at constant 45-55 F? and to make calculation easy and as demand for h/w is more or less constant. Savings = 150/year or 200/year@40%savings. Cost = $300 + installation = $300 = $600. Payback = 2 years or 4 years. or 18 months and 36 months assuming 40% savings. W Tankless w/h assume you save on standby losses first 30%. and 30% of the remaining (by recycling heat) 70% = 21% so net = 50%. Added cost of tankless w/h compared to gas tank w/h approx $250. Savings / month = $25 - per year = 250 (25x10) Cost = (300+250)550 (300+250+100) =950 incld install of tankless heater ($100 added). Payback 2 1/4 years or 3 years - 4 years. You might choose not to include the installation cost of a tankless system, as it has an expected life of 20 years as opposed to 7-12 for a regular water heater. Let me know if you notice any obvious flaws in the above logic. If you live in CA, you are better off sending me a check, so that I can save in these cold climes, just as I would be better off sending you a check to install a PV system, as the sunlight is poorer here than in CA. I say this because I saw that NJ is subsidizing PV's more than CA, You could argue that because there are more sunny hours in CA, you do not need as much of a subsidy, but in NJ with less sun you need more of an incentive. But if we had internal carbon taxes for US only, those in NJ would pay to convert all of CA quicker to PV's, and all of the midwest to wind etc.