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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Road Walker who wrote (183360)	2/23/2004 3:43:48 PM
From: Alighieri	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574826

Actually, an electricity generating system wouldn't have batteries either. When you are using more electricity than the system generates, then you pull from the grid. When you are generating more electricity than you are using, then you feed electricity into the grid, and your meter runs backwards. Good points. Thanks for education. Our solar system heated hot water for bathing and such...my bill was consistently lower than my neighbors by about $30 a month. The system was very reliable and had coil backup, so I never lost water once. Al

To: Road Walker who wrote (183360)	2/23/2004 4:44:16 PM
From: d[-_-]b	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574826

John, re: then you feed electricity into the grid, and your meter runs backwards Not in Washington state, they take any privately created power for free - there is no provision to run the meter backwards. I take that back, some PUD's have started giving credit's - mine doesn't. cityofseattle.net re:Only a person with an axe to grind would argue that solar energy is a bad thing. Again, you're the one passing judgement on anyone that questions the wisdom or cost to individuals. re:there is no magic transforming technology And for much of the country - Solar is not an option.

To: Road Walker who wrote (183360)	2/23/2004 4:56:28 PM
From: d[-_-]b	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574826

John, re:Actually, an electricity generating system wouldn't have batteries either. Not according to this guy in Seattle, he claims: seattlepi.nwsource.com "Do it right with batteries and you do get uninterruptibility, and that's also attractive to people in the city."

To: Road Walker who wrote (183360)	2/23/2004 5:02:41 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574826

What these guys ignore is what I said before, that relieving energy dependency is an incremental solution. one million baby steps; there is no magic transforming technology. You do what you can, where you can. Right now there is no leadership in that direction. John, I think people have problems with the "one million steps". They want a solution......ONE solution......that takes care of the problem in one fell swoop. Its frustrating because that's how we become dependent on fuels like oil. And another thing that is interesting is how rarely conservation is brought up. No one ever wants to think in terms of cutting back. And the irony is that its not that hard to do. In CA, there was a drought in the early '90s and in some CA cities, there was mandatory rationing. Water saving devices became the rage and water consumption dropped by 30% in most parts of the state. Interestingly enough, consumption did not go back up after the drought was over. Bottom line: we consume with such wanton 'grace', its not all that hard to cut back. BTW I had no idea FLA had so much passive solar development. I don't think that's true in CA. ted