Problem #1: How Much Does Heat Cost?

[daestrom]

No I don't live there. This is what gives me the edge over you.

You see, I was born and grew up in California. I now live in Australia
and have developed a much wider view of world affairs. Something you
could use.

I've visited (over several years), seven different countries, all in the
western hemisphere. Your assumptions about my view of world affairs is also
irrelevant.

Not tearing down anything. It is a great page and very informative. But
is only based on money in your pocket. While this is of concern for all
of us what about you national security? What about your energy future?

Not *every* discussion about energy and 'alt.energy.homepower' has to be
turned into some world political discussion about some foreign (for you
anyway) country's energy policies, or social-economic foibles.

You just *couldn't* resist trying to drag in world politics and the US's
energy policies could you? As the saying goes, "sometime's a cigar, is just
a cigar." But not to you apparantly.

People like you with the shallow how much do I get attitude make JFK's
"Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your
country" a joke.

Another assumption on your part. That I haven't done much for my country.
Silly of you considering how little you know about the people that post
here.

If I don't know how much I get, how can I save money for use in a more noble
endeavor? Even a church has to pay for heat, and more money taken out of
the collection plate is less to help humanity's unfortunate. Trying to save
money is *not* evil.

daestrom

 

[George Ghio]

I've visited (over several years), seven different countries, all in the
western hemisphere. Your assumptions about my view of world affairs is also
irrelevant.

Visited. I'm sure that you lived up to the ugly American image.

Not *every* discussion about energy and 'alt.energy.homepower' has to be
turned into some world political discussion about some foreign (for you
anyway) country's energy policies, or social-economic foibles.

Sorry but my passport is USofA. If an aAmerican cannot comment on his
nations problems then who can.

You just *couldn't* resist trying to drag in world politics and the US's
energy policies could you? As the saying goes, "sometime's a cigar, is just
a cigar." But not to you apparantly.

And energy is energy. You should pay attention to how and where it is
used as well as where it comes from. The money in your pocket is of
course important.

Another assumption on your part. That I haven't done much for my country.
Silly of you considering how little you know about the people that post
here.

What? People who think that energy conservation means using less than 20
kWh a day.

If I don't know how much I get, how can I save money for use in a more noble
endeavor? Even a church has to pay for heat, and more money taken out of
the collection plate is less to help humanity's unfortunate. Trying to save
money is *not* evil.

I never said that trying to save money is evil. Not trying to save
energy brings the US population closer to being humanitys unfortunate.

Having no idea where your energy comes form is just being ignorant.

Perhaps you would like to tell us what percentage of the energy in coal
is available at the meter of a home.

All I said was that there is far more to the story of energys cost than
money in your pocket.

You on the other hand sound like the kid who got caught with his hand in
the cookie jar. Very loud with protesting your innocence.

George

 

[Roland Paterson-Jones]

I've visited (over several years), seven different countries, all in the
western hemisphere. Your assumptions about my view of world affairs is also

Not *every* discussion about energy and 'alt.energy.homepower' has to be
turned into some world political discussion about some foreign (for you
anyway) country's energy policies, or social-economic foibles.

You just *couldn't* resist trying to drag in world politics and the US's
energy policies could you? As the saying goes, "sometime's a cigar, is just
a cigar." But not to you apparantly.


Another assumption on your part. That I haven't done much for my country.
Silly of you considering how little you know about the people that post
here.

If I don't know how much I get, how can I save money for use in a more noble
endeavor? Even a church has to pay for heat, and more money taken out of
the collection plate is less to help humanity's unfortunate. Trying to save
money is *not* evil.

Now that you're in the realm of economics, you might like to swallow the
following:

- 80% of the world's savings is currently being spent on US debt.
- 25% of the world's fossil fuel production is consumed by the US.
- 'WMD' might be better termed 'EURO'.

Roland

--
Roland and Lisa Paterson-Jones
Forest Lodge, Stirrup Lane, Hout Bay
http://www.rolandpj.com/forest-lodge
mobile: +27 72 386 8045
e-mail: [email protected]

 

[Steve Spence]

I have some oak on my property. I don't need cabinets, but I need a hot
fire. It's good firewood.

 

[daestrom]

Visited. I'm sure that you lived up to the ugly American image.

My what a bigoted opinion you have of your fellow countrymen. Do you
*assume* all citizens of the US are the same? Really?

BTW, citizens of South America don't appreciate people like you assuming
that 'American' applies only to citizens of the US. Guess your not as
worldly as you thought. Not surprized.

I never said that trying to save money is evil. Not trying to save
energy brings the US population closer to being humanitys unfortunate.

Having no idea where your energy comes form is just being ignorant.

So NOW, you assume I don't know where my energy comes from. Such a silly
assumption. Probably know more about the US energy markets than you think.
But you keep jumping to conclusions, you probably need the excersize.

Perhaps you would like to tell us what percentage of the energy in coal
is available at the meter of a home.

Well I *could* pull a 'George' and insist that my standard consulting
fee/contract be filled out first, but what the heck, I'll give you a
freebie. Steam plant thermal efficiency is on the order of 35-45% depending
on the age/technology. Fuel handling requirements and transport drop the
overall output down to <25%. Then T&D of electricity takes its toll and the
final number is on the order of 15-23%.

But since we were discussing home heating, it's worth mentioning that
converting the energy of any of these sources to electricity is a poor
choice and costs too much. This is easily seen by the OP's web page where
he shows that electric heating is much more *expensive* than wood or fossil
fuel. It's not by accident that a kWhr of energy in the form of electricity
is more expensive than in the form of a cord of wood. But I think you
missed that point.

You on the other hand sound like the kid who got caught with his hand in
the cookie jar. Very loud with protesting your innocence.

I only protest people that all too easily criticize others, yet contribute
nothing of their own. All too often, you decline to answer direct questions
by claiming you need your 'standard consulting fee'. So, are you just here
to promote yourself, or what? Why *are* you here? It certainly isn't to
contribute anything to the community.

daestrom

 

[George Ghio]

My what a bigoted opinion you have of your fellow countrymen. Do you
*assume* all citizens of the US are the same? Really?

No not really. I always hold out hope that people will prove to be
better than they are. But people are just people and being American does
not make them any better or indeed any worse than others.

BTW, citizens of South America don't appreciate people like you assuming
that 'American' applies only to citizens of the US. Guess your not as
worldly as you thought. Not surprized.

Are you so silly that you cannot tell the difference between a country
and a geographical location. South America is not a country. There is
not a United States of South America.

The people I know from Chile call themselves Chilean. And the Bolivians
seem to think that it quite correct to be call such.

So NOW, you assume I don't know where my energy comes from. Such a silly
assumption. Probably know more about the US energy markets than you think.
But you keep jumping to conclusions, you probably need the excersize.

It seems to be perfectly obvious that I did not say any such thing. In
fact the next question rathers proves the point. It leaves it up to you
to decide where you stand.

Well I *could* pull a 'George' and insist that my standard consulting
fee/contract be filled out first, but what the heck, I'll give you a
freebie. Steam plant thermal efficiency is on the order of 35-45% depending
on the age/technology. Fuel handling requirements and transport drop the
overall output down to <25%. Then T&D of electricity takes its toll and the
final number is on the order of 15-23%.

That is very good. Of course you have left out most of the steps in the
losses. But the answer is correct. And I bet it didn't hurt at all.
Perhaps you would like me to post you a detailed description. This is a
pdf so it cannot be posted here with out loseing the maths equations.
But I will email it to you if you wish.

But since we were discussing home heating, it's worth mentioning that
converting the energy of any of these sources to electricity is a poor
choice and costs too much. This is easily seen by the OP's web page where
he shows that electric heating is much more *expensive* than wood or fossil
fuel. It's not by accident that a kWhr of energy in the form of electricity
is more expensive than in the form of a cord of wood. But I think you
missed that point.

You also have good reading and comprehension skills. But why wood
cheaper? How can it be worked out? Would you or for that matter anyone
else like to know.

I only protest people that all too easily criticize others, yet contribute
nothing of their own. All too often, you decline to answer direct questions
by claiming you need your 'standard consulting fee'. So, are you just here
to promote yourself, or what? Why *are* you here? It certainly isn't to
contribute anything to the community.

Ah yes. If you please, just what is my 'standard consulting fee'? You
have mentioned it twice in this one post.

If by standard you mean what I would charge for a system sizing, $0.00.
Or perhaps you are refering to what I charge for providing a circiut
diagram for say a latching pump control circuit, $0.00.

Or maybe you mean the cost of looking at:

<http://community.webshots.com/album/30870272VAADMEwbqw>

This is free as far as I am concerned. All the fees come from your phone
co. or service provider. Neither of which has anything to do with me.

If there is something that someone wants they only have to ask and I
will see if I can get it there. But several thousand hits from these
NG's might be construed as some form of usefulness to some people.

And of course I promote myself, as does any one who posts to NG's and
signs their name.

The only time I ever promoted product for sale was in direct response to
a direct request for a specific product.

George

 

[George Ghio]

Now that you're in the realm of economics, you might like to swallow the
following:

- 80% of the world's savings is currently being spent on US debt.
- 25% of the world's fossil fuel production is consumed by the US.
- 'WMD' might be better termed 'EURO'.

Roland

People eh, love em or hate em they are here to stay.

The USA is around 5% of the worlds population. Of the other 95% 80%
don't like Americans all that much. Perhaps the figures you have
provided hold a clue as to why this is.

George

 

[George Ghio]

very true, but this article had a simple focus which was stated at the
beginning. Heat pumps have a very large install cost. Especially ones that
work in cold climates (ground source). Wood still beats heat pumps for fuel
cost, but not necessarily for emissions. Depends on where your electric
comes from. A Tarm Wood Gasifier is cleaner emissions wise than a electric
heat pump fueled by coal generated electric. It's also cheaper to install,
and run.

Hi. We could play that game some more. Say we use some of that wood to
make a wooden frame, half of it to swap for some glass or polycarb,
and use the day's labour to build a few passive solar heating panels.
Now which is more efficient? Wood.

There's one simple reason we dont all use wood heating, its labour
intensive. We'd really rather spend our time doing other stuff than
carting wood in, raking ashes out and stoking up the fire. We also
prefer to come home to a ready warmed house.[/QUOTE]

This all too true.

Plus when I work out what my labour is worth, wood's value starts to
wilt. Gas is better.

This was part of my point. There is a lot more to the use and cost of
energy. Even wood. For me to supply wood means owning and maintaining a
chain saw, tractor,the heater, and supply the labour.

Then when we look at how much land we'd have to plant up to have
everyone heating with wood, suddenly we notice that the price of wood
would go up sharpish.

"But what need is there to speak of quantity? Are not the mountains seen
to be covered with trees, the valleys full, and the plains occupied? Do
not wild trees outnumber even the leaves of domesticated ones, and the
areas occupied by trees exceed perhaps those that are free."

Vannoccio Biringuccio
The Pirotechnia, 1540

In the year 1230 England was importing wood from Norway.

A good read is the book:

The Book of Masonary Stoves
by David Lyle
ISBN 0-931790-57-3

BTW, point of ignorance here, why do people burn oak? I would have
thought even in short lengths it would have much more value for other
things.

George

 

[George Ghio]

I have some oak on my property. I don't need cabinets, but I need a hot
fire. It's good firewood.

As furniture timber oak is worth a lot of money.

I have a river red gum log that was left in the creek on my property. I
was going to cut it up for fire wood and cut one end off as start to
this end. One cut, that was all it took to find that this peice of wood
abandoned by wood cutters was a nice solid log with a value of around
$1000. What a hard decision that was. Two weeks fire wood or two years
gas. In the end it was the gas and a dining room table, a bed head and a
occasional table. It took maybe 2-3 seconds to make the choice.

George

 

[Tom Quackenbush]

On 15 Oct 2003 06:42:31 -0700, [email protected] (N. Thornton) wrote:

BTW, point of ignorance here, why do people burn oak? I would have
thought even in short lengths it would have much more value for other
things.

Regards, NT

Well, a lot depends on where you live. After living in northern CA,
I was shocked to see how much VG fir costs here in New England.
Also the price of oak "on the stump" is a heckuva lot less than the
price you see at the lumber yard. I don't have any figures, but I'm
pretty sure that most of the price you pay for an oak board pays for
transportation, milling, seasoning, more milling, more transportation,
plus some profit for each of the middlemen and the retailer.

Now, if you own a small sawmill . . ..

R,
Tom Q.

 

[Dave Hinz]

Well, youre in another conutry so things might be different there, but
here Oak is one pricey wood. Here you could sell your cord of oak and
buy many cords of pine with it. Oak is a valuable resource, and I cant
see good sense in just burning it. Perhaps you have oak all over the
place there, free for the taking.

Pine is not a safe wood to burn in controlled-draft situations for long
periods of time, unless you're planning on *very* frequent chimney
cleanings. Oak has a much higher heat content by volume, as well.

Keep in mind, it doesn't have to be "either/or". Trunks are fine for
lumber, branches are not. Lots of volume in the non-trunk parts of
a mature oak tree...there's your firewood, and the trunk if it's
worth using (straight for long enough, etc) can be run through the
sawmill. Some trees just don't have enough good trunk to bother with,
and sawyers won't touch lots of the trees at all (yard trees, fenceline
trees - both likely to have metal in them).

 

[Tony Wesley]

Visited. I'm sure that you lived up to the ugly American image.

That's good. As those who read the book know, the Ugly American was
the good guy.

 

[Roland Paterson-Jones]

Wrong. The US national debt is 7 trillion, which is far larger than it
should be, but it is only a fraction of the hundreds of trillions of
dollars saved in stocks and mortgage funds.

No, take the derivitive. At the time of posting, 80% of world savings were
being spent on US debt.

It has been stated by many well-respected authorities that the current rate
of US debt would put it in a dangerous category were it not for the sheer
size of the economy. In other words, we sure hope it's not a problem, cos
we're going down with you!

True, but misleading. The US taps it's own substantial reserves of
fossil fuels, especially coal.

Sure, but that doesn't help the environment, and, in particular, the Kyoto
protocol.

More worrying is that the US consumption of oil, compared to internal
production, is exploding. Internal oil production is on the decline, but
consumption is rising.

That's just nonsensical.

Not really. The whole world buys oil from OPEC with dollars. That's the only
currency that OPEC accepts.

This creates a huge demand for dollars outside the US. Every country that
buys oil from OPEC has to first buy dollars.

Not only does that help 'balance' the US federal debt, it also allows the US
to print and sell pieces of paper that say 'dollar' on them.

A few months before George Bush (jr) decided that Iraq was a mortal threat,
Saddam Hussain offered to sell oil to France and Russia in Euro's, rather
than dollars.

Guess who was against the UN vote on invading Iraq?

Now that we know that WMD was merely a ruse for invading Iraq (check the
lexicon for WMD - it didn't exist before the Iraq adventure), you really
have to ask yourselves why the US invaded Iraq?

WMD's? No, history now shows that that was a scam.

Euros? Perhaps.

Roland

--
Roland and Lisa Paterson-Jones
Forest Lodge, Stirrup Lane, Hout Bay
http://www.rolandpj.com/forest-lodge
mobile: +27 72 386 8045
e-mail: [email protected]

 

[Steve Spence]

The term Weapons of Mass Destruction was first used in the London Times in
1937

It was quite common in some circles long before the current crisis.

--
Steve Spence
Renewable energy and sustainable living
http://www.green-trust.org
Healthy Living Tips & Habits
http://www.health-e-meals.com/?hop=greentrust

 

[Peter Lowrie]

The term Weapons of Mass Destruction was first used in the London Times in
1937

It was quite common in some circles long before the current crisis.

Although this thread is way off topic, I would like to add my 2 cents worth.
Why did the COW (coalition of willing) invade Iraq. Well, it's all about
Israel firstly and Oil secondarily. USA will impose moral obligations upon
Iraq in leiu of 'setting the Iraqi's free' for years to come. In the end
they will extract enormous economic value from the exercise. Until the
world imposes a solution upon Israel there will be no peace in Middle East.
That war makes a lot of money and that the most part of the worlds wealth
is held by Jewish interests and that the public service in USA is largely
run by nepotistic Jewish interests there will be no peace and they have
little interest in it. Many Rabbis express opinions regarding Israels right
to a homeland in part I totally agree. However, it is my view, that the
modern Jew represents only 1/12 of the total ancient Jewish landscape. At
the latter stages of the fall of the Roman Empire the other 11 Israeli
tribes migrated out of Palestine through into the Steppes, Europe*, Russia
and England. It is my understanding, for example that Mary mother of Jesus
settled in Glastonbury, England. The remaining Jews that remained in
Palestine represent only the Tribe of Judea, however modern Jewry has
(wrongly) taken on the mantle of the remaining 11 Tribes and use this ruse
as a part of their gambit with respect to the land-graps in present day
Palestine. Israel has always existed 'within' Palestine. In this respect
then, most of the rest of us are decendants of the remaining 11 tribes, so
to allow modern Jewry to assume ancestral rights therein is an imposition
on the rest of the western world. Palestines quest for self-determination
will continue to be usurped by Israel due to the size of Israels stick,
until UN imposes upon Israel and relegates them to the area known as Judea
the present Islamic jihad (which is directed primarily at Israel - as
opposed to the secondary western target) will escalate.

* Europe: Named after Europa, the woman impregnated by Jove the Bull; the
essense of Eurpose then is based upon beastial imagery. For evidence of
this check your pre-renaissance art history!

:-o Peter Lowrie