Patrick Turner wrote:
>
> Donga wrote:
>> On Sep 13, 5:48 pm, Terryc <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Donga wrote:
>>>> I read all of that, and it was worth it, thanks Patrick.
>>> Blink! Wadda are you? His straight man or something?
>>>
>>> Are you seriously trying to tell us that at no stage the woop-woop
>>> ******** alert didn't sound?
>>>
>>> pt is firmly of the school that if you can not dazzle them with
>>> brilliance, then baffle them with ********, Copious amounts in pt's
>>> case. Surely you have twigged to this?
>>>
>>> The kindest thing that can be said is that some of his knowledge is way
>>> out of date. About as appropriate as "people who ride in motor cars will
>>> be asphixiated if they travel above 10mph".
>>>
>>> Hint 1, lots of people have solar arrays on their urban roof and do not
>>> pay for mains electricity.
>>>
>>> Hint 2, even if you are a raving nutcase yourself and irrespective of
>>> what you think of them, whenever someone starts rabbitting on about
>>> "greenies" you are definitely entering lala land and about to be dumped
>>> under a pile of ****.
>> What's wrong with enjoying a lot of quite well-written whimsy? It's an
>> improvement on your ranting Terry.
>
> Terry is my natural uneducated enemy. Hopefully not forever though.
>
> Not one thing he's said above prooves I am wrong, he just blathers on.
>
> It is a fact of life that most folks will always have find a necessary
> 24KWH of power each day
> to sustain life in an acceptable manner.
> Its 8,760KWH pa, per head, worth about $1,050 at 12c/KWH. Some use less,
> some use more.
> My numbers are guestimated, and not accurate, but even if I was out by
> 500% either way,
> the cost of power in Oz is a substantial one.
> If 8 million have an income av = 40,000 per annum, income nationally =
> 320 billion pa.
>
> For all Australia, power cost about 22 billion dollars pa.
>
> To establish an alternative power industry and power all vehicles with
> electricity
> after closing down and dismantling all the coal burners, and do it
> without turning nuclear
> and adding this cost to the above yearly bill will make power cost
> rather a lot more than an average
> $1050 per year
>
> Far more sunshine power than this 24KWH falls on the nation, but getting
> it where its wanted
> and storing it for night use is a major hurdle for the "alternative
> industry."
>
> If Terry has some viable alternative, and can argue its worth in similar
> simple to understand terms
> which I have just outlined, I am sure we'd all like to hear about it.
>
> So would the major political parties and heads of industry.
> perhaps Terry knows something they don't.
>
> So c'mom Terry, put up or shut up.
>
> We could then decide if its worth voting for.
>
> Then to save the world, we need to give all such secrets away free to
> anyone wanting to use the techniques.
>
> Patrick Turner
You're pretty close Patrick. I once did all the maths and decided that
even with government tax breaks, you'd never get your money back on a
solar system. The bottom line is that electricity is sold far to cheaply.
Another big con is water tanks, which the West Australian government is
trying to make compulsory in all new homes. When you look at roof areas,
rainfalls, rain patterns and usage rate, it's another great waste of
money. For example, you have a full tank at the start of summer, use it
once to water the lawn and you have an empty tank for the next three or
four months until it rains. And who needs water in the winter time
anyway? It would cost about two grand to set up a basic rain water tank
system, once again you'd never get your money back. Not to mention
health factors, do you chlorinate your rain water?
Dorfus
.
