The tide of change in energy production (22 Jun, 2018)

Have your say on today's Aardvark Daily column

Watts You Say?

Postby Perry » Fri Jun 22, 2018 7:18 pm

I could never quite grasp the validity of CFLs and now LEDs.

Lighting (as a group) is by far the tiniest consumer of electricity in a domestic residence.

Heating water, the house air space and cooking are the big watts gobbler groups.

A small reduction in the 'big three' will outdo a large reduction in lighting watts consumption, every day.

Oh, don't forget to recycle the Hg in all those CFLs being binned, will you? :twisted:
Perry
 
Posts: 529
Joined: Thu May 08, 2014 9:31 pm

Re: The tide of change in energy production (22 Jun, 2018)

Postby roygbiv » Sat Jun 23, 2018 8:12 am

I don't think it is all doom and gloom in NZ considering that we have a huge advantage over other first world countries - in that we already have over 80% of our power generated from 'green' source. What the generators need to have is an overlap of renewable sources ie the nations consumption is 100% at any one time then the combined production of power has got to be greater than that. This is because if there is no sun - this time of year then solar production will be much lower and consumption will be much higher. Therefore solars contribution shortfall has to be covered. Equally, the same if there is no wind which does happen even in Welly, or a drought. It happens today with Huntly, very expensive to keep going but generates to cover shortfalls.
But, all power generators are there to make a profit so an excess of generating potential is deemed as inefficient and their true allegiance is to their shareholders, this is where such an idea breaks down. Like any other industry the power generation one is uncertain. I truly think that in 10-30 years time technology will have advanced that all new houses can be built economically with adequate insulation, power storage and solar generation to be self sufficient. This is what we should be aiming towards as it will defy the present status quo of the economies of scale for power generation and distribution. In the meantime I will remain living in my 100 year old wooden house and paying through the nose to stay warm.
User avatar
roygbiv
 
Posts: 196
Joined: Wed May 21, 2014 9:28 pm

Re: The tide of change in energy production (22 Jun, 2018)

Postby Muscular Jam » Sat Jun 23, 2018 2:37 pm

aardvark_admin wrote:they don't once consider that perhaps, rather than just ramping up energy production, we should be spending far more effort (and money) on reducing energy consumption.
This would appear to be what Trump's spokespeople refer to as an "alternative fact". I put greenpeace and insulation into my favourite search engine (https://www.ecosia.org/)and these are some of Greenpeace's allegedly non-existent comments on insulation and energy efficiency:
https://www.greenpeace.org.uk/what-we-do/climate/energy/reducing-demand/energy-efficiency/ wrote:On the home front, according to the government’s own research, we could cut down the amount of energy we use by at least a third – with no detrimental effects to our lifestyles.

Eighty-three per cent of domestic energy is used for heat. Yet, according to the government’s Energy Saving Trust, the vast majority of our homes are inadequately insulated. As much as a third of heat lost from homes escapes through the walls and another quarter is wasted through the lack of loft insulation.

Properly insulating buildings can often be cheaply and easily remedied – and has an enormous impact.
And another
https://www.greenpeace.org.uk/what-we-do/climate/energy/reducing-demand/personal-use/ wrote:Reducing our energy demand is something that we should be excited about, not scared of. It can save us money (the government estimates that increased efficiency in heating, electricity and transport could save us £12bn in reduced bills), as well as protect our planet.
Heck, they even have a page promoting wave and tidal power at https://greenpeace.org.uk/what-we-do/climate/energy/about/wave-and-tidal-power/Not once eh? tsk tsk tsk

Also we do have a practical fusion generator ready for use right now, I'm enjoying its output as I type.
Muscular Jam
 
Posts: 192
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2017 4:09 pm

Re: Watts You Say?

Postby Kiwiiano » Sat Jun 23, 2018 3:21 pm

Perry wrote:I could never quite grasp the validity of CFLs and now LEDs.

Lighting (as a group) is by far the tiniest consumer of electricity in a domestic residence.

Heating water, the house air space and cooking are the big watts gobbler groups.

A small reduction in the 'big three' will outdo a large reduction in lighting watts consumption, every day.

Oh, don't forget to recycle the Hg in all those CFLs being binned, will you? :twisted:


Our hot water cylinder is turned off in the winter. Wetback wood burner. Cooking hob is gas powered. Lights, tho they are low consumption by comparison are on for long periods. Other devices like dishwasher or clothes washer are on for shorter periods and only at night or weekend rate.
There’s more Hg in your teeth than in a a CFL.
~ Kiwiiano
“I'm right 98% of the time, so who gives a damn about the other 3%?"
Kiwiiano
 
Posts: 411
Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 5:36 pm

Re: Watts You Say?

Postby Perry » Sat Jun 23, 2018 4:43 pm

I do not use electricity to heat water, either, having a wood-fired boiler that I use, all-year-round. (I grow my own trees for the purpose)

As for Hg, I have no amalgam fillings.

My comments related to the average Jill and Joe Bloggs and their domestic arrangements.

Not weirdos like you, me and t'others who haunt these precincts. ;)
Perry
 
Posts: 529
Joined: Thu May 08, 2014 9:31 pm

Re: The tide of change in energy production (22 Jun, 2018)

Postby granada29 » Sat Jun 23, 2018 6:14 pm

paulw wrote:Burning rubbish was suggested for the Meremere power station but the greenies jumped up and down about it so the company who was going to do went to Australia and did the same thing successfully.

No point trying to get any power generation in this country as someone will object to it and they will be permanently outraged and offended on social media.


Not quite true - I was at the NZED when this study was carried out (late 70s early 80s). The reason it was canned was cost. Sorting combustibles from the rubbish stream is very costly, as is the wear and tear on the boiler from the corrosive nature of the fuel. The greenies at the time were actually all in favour of the scheme.
granada29
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2016 8:38 am

Re: The tide of change in energy production (22 Jun, 2018)

Postby Muscular Jam » Sun Jun 24, 2018 7:12 pm

granada29 wrote:The greenies at the time were actually all in favour of the scheme.
Yes, but lets not let facts like that get in the way of mocking those dastardly greenies. ;)
Muscular Jam
 
Posts: 192
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2017 4:09 pm

Re: The tide of change in energy production (22 Jun, 2018)

Postby phill » Sun Jun 24, 2018 8:55 pm

yehh the bastards .. fancy wanting to swim in water you can drink and have air you can breath
have they never heard of profit the selfish pricks
and who the hell cares about the grand kids
and piff their grand kids as well
unheard of
it would be a much better place without those bloody noisy birds as well i can tell you
( ,,,,,,,, ....... A E I O U use em sparingly theres probably not enough )
User avatar
phill
 
Posts: 1632
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2014 8:31 pm

Re: The tide of change in energy production (22 Jun, 2018)

Postby Malcolm » Mon Jun 25, 2018 9:44 am

Muscular Jam wrote:
aardvark_admin wrote:they don't once consider that perhaps, rather than just ramping up energy production, we should be spending far more effort (and money) on reducing energy consumption.
This would appear to be what Trump's spokespeople refer to as an "alternative fact". I put greenpeace and insulation into my favourite search engine (https://www.ecosia.org/)and these are some of Greenpeace's allegedly non-existent comments on insulation and energy efficiency:
https://www.greenpeace.org.uk/what-we-do/climate/energy/reducing-demand/energy-efficiency/ wrote:On the home front, according to the government’s own research, we could cut down the amount of energy we use by at least a third – with no detrimental effects to our lifestyles.

Eighty-three per cent of domestic energy is used for heat. Yet, according to the government’s Energy Saving Trust, the vast majority of our homes are inadequately insulated. As much as a third of heat lost from homes escapes through the walls and another quarter is wasted through the lack of loft insulation.

Properly insulating buildings can often be cheaply and easily remedied – and has an enormous impact.
And another
https://www.greenpeace.org.uk/what-we-do/climate/energy/reducing-demand/personal-use/ wrote:Reducing our energy demand is something that we should be excited about, not scared of. It can save us money (the government estimates that increased efficiency in heating, electricity and transport could save us £12bn in reduced bills), as well as protect our planet.
Heck, they even have a page promoting wave and tidal power at https://greenpeace.org.uk/what-we-do/climate/energy/about/wave-and-tidal-power/Not once eh? tsk tsk tsk

Also we do have a practical fusion generator ready for use right now, I'm enjoying its output as I type.


Also similar here is a hydro-scheme that is in the planning stages. It was actually designed for minimal impact on the river ecosystem. It will divert some of the water from the main flow to the turbine and then it will rejoin downstream. No dams or anything like that. Minimum flow set to a level to keep the fish healthy and happy. Can even allow all water through the natural path from time to time if needed (spawning times etc). From the outset it was designed hand in hand with environmentalists and has DOC approval in principle.It is being opposed by Kayaking NZ as they are worried about not being able to use it for kayaking. Even though it is extremely remote and is used only a few times a year, if that. It is one of the most challenging white water kayak rivers in the country. Only a few kayakers are actually up to riding it. No reason it can't have the water diverted on a few days for them either.
Would you like to guess who people on the street blame for holding up the project? That is right, the 'greenies'. Whether it is Greenpeace(I think one of the initial consultants represented them BTW), DOC or the Green Party is a mystery though.
Malcolm
 
Posts: 306
Joined: Thu May 08, 2014 9:43 am

Re: The tide of change in energy production (22 Jun, 2018)

Postby Muscular Jam » Mon Jun 25, 2018 6:12 pm

Malcolm wrote:It is being opposed by Kayaking NZ as they are worried about not being able to use it for kayaking.
Hmm, that shouldn't be a problem. my local hydro station regularly releases water on a sunday for the rafters which creates a grade 5. https://trustpower.co.nz/our-assets-and-capability/power-generation/wairoa-river-flow-dates
Muscular Jam
 
Posts: 192
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2017 4:09 pm

Previous

Return to Today's column

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron