Everything You Know About Saving Energy is Wrong

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
This article says that almost everything you know about saving energy is wrong. Then again, most of us have multi-monitor set-ups with CrossFire X / SLI and 1,000W power supplies so I don’t think we are the targeted audience for this article. :D

According to the researchers, basically every trope that we follow about how to save energy is in fact wrong. “Participants estimated that line-drying clothes saves more energy than changing the washer’s settings (the reverse is true) and estimated that a central air-conditioner uses only 1.3 times the energy of a room air-conditioner (in fact, it uses 3.5 times as much).”
Click to expand...
 
uhm.. well line drying does saves me on gas and electric bills on the dryer...
 
Steve said:
This article says that almost everything you know about saving energy is wrong. Then again, most of us have multi-monitor set-ups with CrossFire X / SLI and 1,000W power supplies so I don’t think we are the targeted audience for this article. :D
Click to expand...

ahem. 1010W...punks
 
Most of the comments at the end of the article rip it to shreds. It confuses people into thinking that only purchasing more efficient equipment will truly save energy and really discounts conservative use of existing equipment.
 
The whole survey seems to be done in a confusing way in the first place.

For instance:

Participants estimated that line-drying clothes saves more energy than changing the washer’s settings (the reverse is true)
Click to expand...

How many of you saw that as "changing the dryer's settings" on first glance?
 
i think this is kinda funny because i've been saying it for years now. most of the idiot things people do to 'save energy' just don't work. how about change the washer settings AND use a clothes line? that works for me:p
 
What are people now washing their clothes on the 3 hour setting regularly or something?

P.S. Who the F thinks that a central AC unit only uses 1.3 times the electricty of a room unit? Did they survey morons, homeless people or vegetables?
 
ChronoReverse said:
The whole survey seems to be done in a confusing way in the first place.

For instance:



How many of you saw that as "changing the dryer's settings" on first glance?
Click to expand...

I comprehended it just fine. But who doesn't know that washing in cold water vs hot water nets a very large energy savings?

bh192012 said:
What are people now washing their clothes on the 3 hour setting regularly or something?

P.S. Who the F thinks that a central AC unit only uses 1.3 times the electricty of a room unit? Did they survey morons, homeless people or vegetables?
Click to expand...

It's just what people think. A lot of people have a very poor grasp on physics and it shows in studies like this.
 
"Everything" we know is wrong? Yeah, no. I'm pretty damn sure the new windows we got installed, along with the new washer/dryer, are a shit ton more efficient than what we had before.
 
bh192012 said:
What are people now washing their clothes on the 3 hour setting regularly or something?

P.S. Who the F thinks that a central AC unit only uses 1.3 times the electricty of a room unit? Did they survey morons, homeless people or vegetables?
Click to expand...

I use a central AC vs a room unit because I found I hated moving the unit from room to room.
 
Why don't we have solar power in homes yet? It's doable, and I wouldn't hurt the environment. Plus, if I get a electric car I can power it with my homes solar. That way I can consume as much power as I want, and nobody will give a shit.

I've been thinking of putting in solar power in my home, but I could never find a good guide on how to do it.
 
"estimated that a central air-conditioner uses only 1.3 times the energy of a room air-conditioner (in fact, it uses 3.5 times as much).”


I know it's total BS the modern Air-confitioner's running 18 seer or higher running on 240V vs a windows unit running on 120V is night and day. It is always has been and will be cheaper to have equipment running on 240V plus if your paying for the power peaks the whole house AC will win hands down. Where 2 windows units could jump your peak very high if both powered on at the same time.


This person knows nothing about power and equipment.
 
I am so with you, I was looking at solar equipment and was about to buy Enphase Energy microinverter's and 220watt Monocrystalline panels

But I never could find out how much load my roof would handle as the same time would it be possible to store some of the power with my setup.

Oh well.
 
Ashbringer said:
Why don't we have solar power in homes yet? It's doable, and I wouldn't hurt the environment. Plus, if I get a electric car I can power it with my homes solar. That way I can consume as much power as I want, and nobody will give a shit.

I've been thinking of putting in solar power in my home, but I could never find a good guide on how to do it.
Click to expand...

joe91584 said:
I am so with you, I was looking at solar equipment and was about to buy Enphase Energy microinverter's and 220watt Monocrystalline panels

But I never could find out how much load my roof would handle as the same time would it be possible to store some of the power with my setup.

Oh well.
Click to expand...

Much of the problem with PV panels (solar) is three-fold:
1) Most PV panels are still relatively low output, which makes it difficult for the average home to put up enough panels to handle all of your electrical needs.

The highest output panel I found in a brief google search was rated 290 watts.
It puts out roughly 50 volts at 6 amps.
Each panel measures about 75" x 50".


2) Since the vast majority of common electrical/electronic devices in homes use AC voltage, setting up a PV panel system also involves the use of an inverter system to convert from DC to AC.
The process is inherently inefficient, exacerbating the problem of low-output panels.

Often, these inverters are combined with devices that allow you to tie your PV panel system to the public electric grid.
Usually, this type of setup allows you to add your system's output to the public electrical grid when excess power is produced by your system and allows your home to be fed by the electric company when demand exceeds the PV system's capabilities.

Unfortunately electrical companies have run into problems with badly designed or badly executed systems and sometimes shy away from allowing private systems to back-feed onto the grid.
Combine that with their natural animosity over systems that allow you to live "off the grid" and you have a situation that's difficult to reconcile.

3) As joe91584 mentioned, storing power is something most users would desire, but no one has come up with an efficient and economical way to do so.

If we can develop PV panels that generate a lot more energy per square foot and if electronic makers are willing to move to DC power, we might see a lot more growth in this area.
 
joe91584 said:
As usual, they ignore the cost.

I only use my Central Air when absolutely necessary, like this week since highs have been well over 90F, and it was still over 80F at 9:00pm several nights. A couple weeks of very hot weather can cause my electric bill to go up 4x to 5x. I could replace my air conditioner with something more efficient, but then I'd also have to replace heater too, since it's over 25 years old.

Since using the Air Conditioner a few months out of the year cost me about $600 extra per year, it's hard to justify spending $8,000+ to replace the 5 ton system. Even if it cut my cost in half (unlikely) it would take over 25 years to break even. I'd be better off putting the $8,000 in the bank and using it to pay the extra on the electric bill.
Click to expand...
 
So what if central air uses 3.5 times more energy than a room air conditioner.. I know for me.. I have 7 rooms in my house.. So when you divide the # of rooms with the energy usage, central air is actually more efficient!
 
gizo said:
So what if central air uses 3.5 times more energy than a room air conditioner.. I know for me.. I have 7 rooms in my house.. So when you divide the # of rooms with the energy usage, central air is actually more efficient!
Click to expand...

It really bad to try and use room air conditioner if it's improperly sized (BTU and square foot, but BTUs is more important). Too small a unit, and it runs constantly (and therefore inefficiently); too large a unit and it will cycle more than needed (again, inefficient and detrimental to the equipment). Worse yet, some will just buy the biggest unit they can fit in the window or sleeve or will plug into the outlet without taking into consideration the heat load of the room (or rooms).

A properly sized air handling unit and central air system in a properly insulated building will probably cost less than the 3.5x room air handler to run, especially now with the whole efficiency push industry wide.

*Sorry for the rant...HVAC engineering student here.*
 
gathagan said:
If we can develop PV panels that generate a lot more energy per square foot and if electronic makers are willing to move to DC power, we might see a lot more growth in this area.
Click to expand...

Those 290 watt panels cost a fortune. I was looking into putting a low cost solution, for maybe a few power hungry appliances, like the computer or TV. I've also seen some inverters with USB plugs. Could we see USB as the future of DC home power plug, for at least small appliances?

Everyone knows they could do it. The government and the corporations. It took them less then a month to force people to switch from AGP to PCI-X. The only reasons solar panels cost so much is because they're not being mass produced.

If anyone is looking to put a decent solar power setup into their homes you'll need to spend at least $10k. That isn't realistically cheaper in the long run.

If they can force me to recycle, they can force me to get solar power. Except solar power helps me more then them.
 
gathagan said:
Much of the problem with PV panels (solar) is three-fold:
1) Most PV panels are still relatively low output, which makes it difficult for the average home to put up enough panels to handle all of your electrical needs.

The highest output panel I found in a brief google search was rated 290 watts.
It puts out roughly 50 volts at 6 amps.
Each panel measures about 75" x 50".


2) Since the vast majority of common electrical/electronic devices in homes use AC voltage, setting up a PV panel system also involves the use of an inverter system to convert from DC to AC.
The process is inherently inefficient, exacerbating the problem of low-output panels.

Often, these inverters are combined with devices that allow you to tie your PV panel system to the public electric grid.
Usually, this type of setup allows you to add your system's output to the public electrical grid when excess power is produced by your system and allows your home to be fed by the electric company when demand exceeds the PV system's capabilities.

Unfortunately electrical companies have run into problems with badly designed or badly executed systems and sometimes shy away from allowing private systems to back-feed onto the grid.
Combine that with their natural animosity over systems that allow you to live "off the grid" and you have a situation that's difficult to reconcile.

3) As joe91584 mentioned, storing power is something most users would desire, but no one has come up with an efficient and economical way to do so.

If we can develop PV panels that generate a lot more energy per square foot and if electronic makers are willing to move to DC power, we might see a lot more growth in this area.
Click to expand...

gathagan said:

The highest output panel I found in a brief google search was rated 290 watts.
It puts out roughly 50 volts at 6 amps.
Each panel measures about 75" x 50".
Click to expand...

lets just look at this part... a standard coffee maker... 120v 1200w... thats ten amps at the wall.. if you use a straight a/c to d/c pure sine inverter you would need to run 6 panels total in a 3x2 series/parallel configuration just to run your coffee maker (well..... and then some.. but not much more) this would give you 150v@12 amps at the panel output. because it is d/c you expect 5% loss (3-5% but always use higher) and 3 to 5% more at the inverter

5% to 150v@12a = [email protected]
and
5% 10 [email protected] = [email protected] amps

so you would have 15v of bleed over to deal with (not a huge deal) and just barely have enough amperage to cover the max draw of the coffer maker BUT... that is a area of 150"x150" or 12.5 ft square (closer to 13ft by 12ft 9in by the time you get done with panel gaps). thats JUST your coffee maker. to fully cover a 2000sqft household with a pretty standard 100a or 150a service, well... @ 100a that would be a 3x20 grid or a 3x30 grid at 150a


((75"x3)/12)x((50"x20)/12)
(150/12)x(1000/12)
12.5ft x 83.3ft or 1041 sqft (not including panel gaps).... on a 2000 sqft home assuming no gables, you could not fit a gapless solution on 1/2 of the roof for 100 amp service.

now add to this battery systems which use 6v power cells that have to be run in a series parallel series configuration in order to meet the amperage demands.

the ones i used where 200 amp cells, and the industry standard is 6v deep cycle cells. so you would need 6v+6v to get the 12v circuit then 12v*10 to get the 120v circuit... so 20 cells total to get 200ah.. at full load thats 2 hours worth of run time (for about 100$ per cell) of course no one runs at max (or very near it hardly ever) if you solar array happens to be under cloud cover the arrays efficiency drops off VERY quickly, i had mine set up to supply 8 times my max load from the batteries (or 8 hours @100a... 80 cells, each slightly smaller than a standard car battery) this would keep me afloat on solar trickle and battery power for about a week.. if the cloud cover lasted longer than that (and it often did) i had to fire up the generator. (water heater, oven and dryer where gas)

this dosent mention the cabling, (which at 100a is 1/0awg for a 25ft run) inverter, surge, over voltage, spark suppressors, and back feed (for generator/grid) and ground float equipment costs.
 
looked at the prices for the 290w solar cells which i was factoring off of, they are about 1100$ per. so for 100a service (3x20) your looking at spending 66,000$ just on the solar cells and 8000$ on the batteries, again not mentioning the other equipment and installation costs needed. so, add at least 72,000$ onto the cost of your home.

thats why solar isn't main stream.
 
Thor said:
looked at the prices for the 290w solar cells which i was factoring off of, they are about 1100$ per. so for 100a service (3x20) your looking at spending 66,000$ just on the solar cells and 8000$ on the batteries, again not mentioning the other equipment and installation costs needed. so, add at least 72,000$ onto the cost of your home.

thats why solar isn't main stream.
Click to expand...

I looked at the costs and came to about the same numbers. Didn't make sense unless I was going to build new on a lot and have it factored in to construction costs.
 
I promise that after this century is over I will totally conserve energy really efficiently.
 
New construction is really the only way 'green' technology can work. Once the energy demand is lowered as much as possible with good design, then solar and geothermal mechanical systems become smaller and affordable.

An overall approach must be used. It is a non-starter to use photovoltaic to make hot water or run an air conditioner, just as geothermal won't cool a house with too much solar gain.
 
Actually I've spent more than few hours on calculating energy savings from higher rated power supplies with silver/gold etc vs 80+. Sadly with the price of 87+ PSU the time to break even was beetween 5 to 7 years and that's with my pattern of 60-70 hours per week without going to idle mode due to boinc.

For people who use computer normally and often have cpu and gpu in idle mode the price diffrence was making it not worth of investment into power saving.

Hopefully that new platinum rated fortron 450W psu platform will bring some nice power efficiency into affordable price ranges.
 
Everthing I knew??? Oh good i'm getting moar killawatts and going to go burn nature things!!! Then go to windfarms and any crazy's house with solar panels and burn them the fuck down!!! Then ill go die in a swamp so ill turn into fossil fuels in a million years!!!
 
There's really no such thing as conservation IMO.

It's simply "subsidizing your neighbor's consumption."
 
What many people don't realize, and I think the article emphasized it enough through a bit if its ignorance, is that green energy sources should be used in parallel. Yeah, you won't get jack with solar panels and you're at the mercy of the wind for wind turbines, but use them together and you have some overlap in production of energy.
 
Guys. Everything you know about how to browse the Internet and these forums... is wrong. Just hate to break it to you, but it's the truth!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top