Fuel saving program

S

solituna

New member
Jan 26, 2004
213
0
0
I suppose the smartest comment I've heard, on the radio, about this issue, is:

If people were given a constant AC supply, then all the plantas in the DR wouldn't be needed. Wouldn't that save a lot of fuel for the country?????

E pa lante que vamos! Co?o! Diablo!
 
D

duhtree

New member
Jun 2, 2003
414
0
0
electrical savings

On a related note I read in the diario today that those that use more then 2 megas at a time (I am guessing this means monthly) then they could purchase directly from the distributor and by pass edesur-edenorte And that the costs would be $09 per. as opposed to $.23 per kilowatthour.
Does that mean that a community such as condo compound or development would be able to avail themselves of those prices. I would think that their usage would qualify them. Is this wrong?
 
D

Don Juan

Living Brain Donor
Dec 5, 2003
856
0
0
It can be done.

collectively, our nation can save 50% on total electricity consumption by just switching from incandescent to flourescent light bulbs. The latter may cost more but last a lot longer and use up only one tenth the energy of the former. The obvious bonus is that more megawatts can be diverted to sorely needed areas in our shantytowns, thereby placating people and possibly reducing crime.
 
E

Escott

Gold
Jan 14, 2002
7,716
6
0
www.escottinsosua.blogspot.com
Don Juan said:
collectively, our nation can save 50% on total electricity consumption by just switching from incandescent to flourescent light bulbs. The latter may cost more but last a lot longer and use up only one tenth the energy of the former. The obvious bonus is that more megawatts can be diverted to sorely needed areas in our shantytowns, thereby placating people and possibly reducing crime.
Click to expand...
50% on bulbs and NOT total Electicity which is meaningless. Refrigerators, A/C, Electric water heaters and recharging the stupid inverter batteries are what costs money here. Not the stankin light bulbs.

Besides I feel like I am at a low budget film when I have that crap in my eyes.

Escott
 
T

Texas Bill

Silver
Feb 11, 2003
2,174
26
0
97
www.texasbill.com
Fluerescent lights are a good idea-----

Providing the electrical supply maintains 100+ volts. Below that they don't function. I've converted to FB's completely and there are times when the inverter power is exhausted and we have no lights in the house even tho the "electricity" is being supplied, but at an 80-90 volt range.

Catch-22 no matter what.

Texas Bill
 
D

Don Juan

Living Brain Donor
Dec 5, 2003
856
0
0
A/C's + heaters= energy hogs

Escott said:
50% on bulbs and NOT total Electicity which is meaningless. Refrigerators, A/C, Electric water heaters and recharging the stupid inverter batteries are what costs money here. Not the stankin light bulbs.

Besides I feel like I am at a low budget film when I have that crap in my eyes.

Escott
Click to expand...

You can have plentyful hot water by "going solar". It cost little, it's low maintenance and won't rely on the grid.

You can do away with a/c units by simply building a dome around the highest point of your home. As hot air rises and is vented out the dome, it creates a vacuum and sucks in cooler air from below thus maintaining a constant cool breeze. Won't cost much, it's better than a/c and works 24/7.
Don't know what to do with refrigerators.
 
H

HOWMAR

Silver
Jan 28, 2004
2,624
2
0
duhtree said:
On a related note I read in the diario today that those that use more then 2 megas at a time (I am guessing this means monthly) then they could purchase directly from the distributor and by pass edesur-edenorte And that the costs would be $09 per. as opposed to $.23 per kilowatthour.
Does that mean that a community such as condo compound or development would be able to avail themselves of those prices. I would think that their usage would qualify them. Is this wrong?
Click to expand...
Technically large users can purchase directly from the producer and bypass the distributor, but it is not very practical..First, the end user must install his own sub-station to receive the high-voltage. This substation must be for the sole use of the end-user. The cost I have seen is between US $150-300,000. Then the electric bought must be for the exclusive use of the purchaser. It cannot be resold or distributed. So in the case of a condo, the association cannot distribute to individual units with separate meters. I guess you can share the electric to all the units as a common charge, but the small users would object to paying the same as the large users. Even in industrial parks one has to be a very large user of electric for this to be practical.
 
NALs

NALs

Economist by Profession
Jan 20, 2003
13,485
3,189
113
Escott said:
50% on bulbs and NOT total Electicity which is meaningless. Refrigerators, A/C, Electric water heaters and recharging the stupid inverter batteries are what costs money here. Not the stankin light bulbs.

Besides I feel like I am at a low budget film when I have that crap in my eyes.

Escott
Click to expand...
Ok Escott, whatever you say...:rolleyes:

I suppose you don't keep track of the little things that ADDS UP?!

hmm...
 
M

mariaobetsanov

New member
Jan 2, 2002
337
0
0
that system is called the vertruvi effect. is best done by underground air intake vents, and high out vents this is as old as sin.
 
D

Don Juan

Living Brain Donor
Dec 5, 2003
856
0
0
Yes it is.

mariaobetsanov said:
that system is called the vertruvi effect. is best done by underground air intake vents, and high out vents this is as old as sin.
Click to expand...

I read about this system many years ago in "Mother Earth" magazine. You're right, it does work best with the underground intake vents but it becomes more expensive as you'd have to retrofit. It's best to just build the dome and open lower windows on the shady side of the house.
Also, as it is obvious to everyone that, if you have the space,it's a good thing to plant shade trees on the eastern side of your home.
When my home was built in east Sto. Dgo., a large vent was constructed over were the stove would be. Since my home is two-tiered, all the cool air rises from the lower level and up this vent. Problem is, when cooking, this vent has to be closed or the stove flames go out thus defeating its purpose. At other times it does its job marvelously.
My home gets so cool, that at night, you'd need a blanked to keep warm even in summer months. I wonder why people don't incorporate this sensible system when building new homes?
 
Last edited:
M

Mirador

On Permanent Vacation!
Apr 15, 2004
3,563
0
0
mariaobetsanov said:
that system is called the vertruvi effect. is best done by underground air intake vents, and high out vents this is as old as sin.
Click to expand...

"The Venturi effect is a special case of the Bernoulli effect, in the case of fluid or air flow through a tube or pipe with a constriction in in it. The fluid must speed up in the restriction, reducing its pressure and producing a partial vacuum via the Bernoulli Effect. It is named after the Italian physicist Giovanni Battista Venturi. ..."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venturi_effect
 
M

Mirador

On Permanent Vacation!
Apr 15, 2004
3,563
0
0
A

ariel.ob

New member
Oct 28, 2005
1
0
0
fuel savings program: FULL OF ERRORS!

The fuel savings program implemented by the PLD government is full of mistakes. I wonder how those analysts come up with so bad policy ideas...

Their policies are superficial, and do not try to tackle fuel demand. The demand for fuel is quite inelastic (if price goes up the demand doesn't go down that much) because there are few substitutes to fuel.

They have to think it that way, "giving people alternatives".

Limiting the time that fuel pumps are open is a newbie error. That does not cut the demand, it only makes waiting lines longer. People consume the same amount of fuel (well, in fact people are consuming less because of the higher price of fuel, but not because pumps are closed half of the time)...

It's amazing how incompetent our policymakers are...
 
T

Texas Bill

Silver
Feb 11, 2003
2,174
26
0
97
www.texasbill.com
The Gov't doesn't-----

give much thought to solutions in ANY of the problems it is faced with.
The agenda seem to be: Deny something to the people for a long enough time and they'll get acustomed to doing without. Then they won't think about it anymore.
I agree that the present approach isn't really doing the job of "saving" fuel. It only exacerbates the problem faced by the using public.
The gov't has practiced fallacious reasoning for so lon, they don't seem to know any other way of reasoning a problem through.
Too bad, too, because the solution is staring them in the face on most things.
They're so concentrated on "IMAGE" they can't see the forest for the trees.

Texas Bill
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom