freeview boxes - are most lousy ?

"Kay Robinson" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 12 Jul 2009 19:34:29 +0100, "Bill Wright"
sharpened a new quill and scratched:


"Kay Robinson" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 11 Jul 2009 10:19:28 +0100, Roderick Stewart
sharpened a new quill and
I take it then that you believe switching an immersion heater on only
when you need hot water is the way to go? Thermastatic controls have
moved on since WWII. It may take 1000w to heat a kettle up from cold,
to keep it hot may only take 1w per hour.

Kay

Look Kay, you really are out of your depth here. This isn't the sort of
woolly issue where people like you can spout unsubstantiated drivel, and
wacky theories abound, it's a scientific question which can be settled by
the application of some simple straightforward physical principles. These
guys on here know their stuff. They have been trained to use scientific
method.

An example of your woolly thought and lack of knowledge is the expression
'may only take 1w per hour' which you use above.

Firstly it's 'W', not 'w'.

Secondly '1W per hour' is meaningless. You could say '1W for an hour' --
that's 1 Watt of energy expended for an hour -- but not '1W per hour'
Struggling with the distinction? I thought so.

Thirdly, and most important, you've just made that figure up. It's a
totally
spurious statistic. That behaviour might be acceptable amongst you wooly
thinkers, but it certainly ain't science!

This sort of muddled thinking is prevalent amonst certain types of people
and it explains a lot of barmy stuff -- shen fui, astrology, gold plated
speaker leads, etc.
Bill

Simply put, when I'm in all day I drink about 18 cups of tea during
that period. I have a wattmeter and placing this in the socket then
making my cups in the normal way ie switching on to heat enough for
that cup each time took the reading, I then filled the kettle and
leaving it on I went about my normal business, only needing to top up
the kettle and found that the wattage used was some 50% less that the
previous method. Now to me that's a saving. Science apart all I'm
interested in is in cutting down my electric consunption, not for
'green' issues or 'saving the planet' simply in saving myself money
out of my pension. Naturally I don't leave it on all night nor when
I'm going out for the day. All the remarks, sneering, patronising or
whatever don't detract from the fact that I'm making some saving on my
electric consumtion. That's all that matters.
Kay


If you want to save more, get one of the new near instant water boiling
kettles that boil only the water poured

Steve Terry

On Mon, 13 Jul 2009 12:06:02 +0100, brightside S9
wrote:

pedant mode
snip
It should now be obvious that to keep a kettle of water at a given
temperature, given that it is impossible to stop heat loss by
radiation from the kettle, it will take energy to achieve the
maintenance of the required water temperature.

/pedant mode

Still in pedant mode: wouldn't more heat be lost from a kettle by
convection that by radiation?

Insulation in the form of a "kettle cosy" would help to keep the water
up to temperature.

I found a patent application fo a kettle cosy:
http://smtp2.patent.gov.uk/p-find-pu...lNum ber=6262

This has a reference to a UK Govt. briefing note DEFRA BNCK06: Kettle
trends. This has interesting figures in Table 1:
http://www.hartleyinnovative.co.uk/d...EFRA%20MTP.pdf

Energy use per kettle per year (kWh)

Standard kettle 169.6
Eco kettle 118.72
Keep warm kettle 248.26

Totals for all kettles of a type:

Energy saved/added per year (TWh)

Standard kettle
Eco kettle 1.27 saved
Keep warm kettle 1.96 added

Carbon saved/added per year (MtC)

Standard kettle
Eco kettle 0.14 saved
Keep warm kettle 0.22 added

"Keep warm" kettles are the worst on all criteria.

On Mon, 13 Jul 2009 14:17:51 +0100, Peter Duncanson
wrote:

On Mon, 13 Jul 2009 12:06:02 +0100, brightside S9
wrote:

pedant mode
snip
It should now be obvious that to keep a kettle of water at a given
temperature, given that it is impossible to stop heat loss by
radiation from the kettle, it will take energy to achieve the
maintenance of the required water temperature.

/pedant mode

Still in pedant mode: wouldn't more heat be lost from a kettle by
convection that by radiation?

It's all down to actualities like properties of the appliance's
materials - what it's made off (steel will conduct heat away more
quickly than plastic, but plastic will likely radiate more, depending
on it's colour, black radiates off more heat than white), where it is,
etc, etc. But I suspect that in most, perhaps all, practical
situations you'd probably be right.

Insulation in the form of a "kettle cosy" would help to keep the water
up to temperature.

I found a patent application fo a kettle cosy:
http://smtp2.patent.gov.uk/p-find-pu...lNum ber=6262

Takes me back to the days when a teapot was kept well stewed on the
side of the stove with a tea-cosy over it!

This has a reference to a UK Govt. briefing note DEFRA BNCK06: Kettle
trends. This has interesting figures in Table 1:
http://www.hartleyinnovative.co.uk/d...EFRA%20MTP.pdf

Energy use per kettle per year (kWh)

Standard kettle 169.6
Eco kettle 118.72
Keep warm kettle 248.26

Totals for all kettles of a type:

Energy saved/added per year (TWh)

Standard kettle
Eco kettle 1.27 saved
Keep warm kettle 1.96 added

Carbon saved/added per year (MtC)

Standard kettle
Eco kettle 0.14 saved
Keep warm kettle 0.22 added

"Keep warm" kettles are the worst on all criteria.

GOOD FIND! Exactly bears out in practical experience what I was
saying in my thought experiment when replying to Rod (which of course
was really aimed at Kay, though she doesn't show any sign of having
read it, let alone of having understood it).

However, I note that they probably don't include the eco-cost
(pollution, including CO2 produced) of production and disposal written
off as an annual 'overhead' over the product's lifetime, which is
essential to get the full picture. If my experience is typical,
including that would change the prospects for the eco-kettles
somewhat.

======================================

Please always reply to news group as the email address in
this post's header does not exist. Alternatively, use one of the
contact addresses at:
http://www.macfh.co.uk/JavaJive/JavaJive.html
http://www.macfh.co.uk/Macfarlane/Macfarlane.html

In article ,
Kay Robinson wrote:

Simply put, when I'm in all day I drink about 18 cups of tea during
that period. I have a wattmeter and placing this in the socket then
making my cups in the normal way ie switching on to heat enough for
that cup each time took the reading, I then filled the kettle and
leaving it on I went about my normal business, only needing to top up
the kettle and found that the wattage used was some 50% less that the
previous method.

Wattage doesn't mean anything as far as energy consumption. It's watthours
or more usually kilowatthours that matter. ie how long you use those watts
for. A 2kW kettle used less watts than a 3kW one, but takes far longer to
heat the water and actually uses more energy - that's what matters





Now to me that's a saving. Science apart all I'm
interested in is in cutting down my electric consunption, not for
'green' issues or 'saving the planet' simply in saving myself money
out of my pension. Naturally I don't leave it on all night nor when
I'm going out for the day. All the remarks, sneering, patronising or
whatever don't detract from the fact that I'm making some saving on my
electric consumtion.

I think what I, and others, are saying is that there is no way you can use
less energy with this device.

--
From KT24

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.11

In article , charles
wrote:
In article , Kay Robinson
wrote:

Simply put, when I'm in all day I drink about 18 cups of tea during
that period. I have a wattmeter and placing this in the socket then
making my cups in the normal way ie switching on to heat enough for
that cup each time took the reading, I then filled the kettle and
leaving it on I went about my normal business, only needing to top up
the kettle and found that the wattage used was some 50% less that the
previous method.

Wattage doesn't mean anything as far as energy consumption.

In this context I would go further. The comment about "wattage used was
some 50% less" is at best ambiguous and at worst meaninless. What does
"wattage used" mean in the above assertion? No way to tell from what was
written, so we'd have to guess.

Does show that when people are clueless about the relevant science they can
easily become muddled or mislead.

Now to me that's a saving. Science apart all I'm interested in is in
cutting down my electric consunption,

What do you mean by "electric consumption"? Power or energy? The difference
is critical. For the reasons others have explained and exampled. You can
easily have situation where higher power applied can *save* energy. So you
need to understand and make your mind up. Hint: It is the energy that the
power co will charge you for. :-)

not for 'green' issues or 'saving the planet' simply in saving myself
money out of my pension. Naturally I don't leave it on all night nor
when I'm going out for the day. All the remarks, sneering, patronising
or whatever don't detract from the fact that I'm making some saving on
my electric consumtion.

But they might warn that your belief this is a "fact" may be wrong. Still,
its your money. if you want to waste it if you have confused
energy with power, that's your free... erm, costly choice. :-)

Slainte,

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

In article , Kay Robinson wrote:
Simply put, when I'm in all day I drink about 18 cups of tea during
that period. I have a wattmeter and placing this in the socket then
making my cups in the normal way ie switching on to heat enough for
that cup each time took the reading, I then filled the kettle and
leaving it on I went about my normal business, only needing to top up
the kettle and found that the wattage used was some 50% less that the
previous method. Now to me that's a saving. Science apart all I'm
interested in is in cutting down my electric consunption, not for
'green' issues or 'saving the planet' simply in saving myself money
out of my pension. Naturally I don't leave it on all night nor when
I'm going out for the day. All the remarks, sneering, patronising or
whatever don't detract from the fact that I'm making some saving on my
electric consumtion. That's all that matters.

You can't be. It's not possible. If you measure the amount of *energy*
used throughout the day (not the wattage), and your instrument is
accurate, then it will show you what's really going on. But regardless
of this, a thought experiment and pure reason should be enough.

It takes a certain amount of energy to boil enough water for a cup of
tea, and twice as much for two cups of tea, three times as much for
three, and so on. It doesn't matter whether you boil the water quickly
or slowly; it can take minutes or hours to reach boiling point, and the
same amount of energy will be used for boiling the water every time.

What *does* matter is the heat lost to the surroundings while the water
is being heated and before it is poured out (thereby becoming no longer
part of the equation). This energy is in addition to the energy that
actually boils the water. This heat loss might be very small, but it is
always there and can never be less than zero. It occurs all the time the
kettle contains water at a higher temperature than its surroundings.
Heat the water very quickly with a high power kettle which is
subsequently switched off, and this condition only lasts a few minutes
with little heat loss in between cups of tea, and practically none when
the kettle has cooled down, but keep it just off the boil all day and
there will be a constant heat loss, which will cost you *more* energy
than boiling just enough water as quickly as possible when you need it.

You'll never use less energy by keeping something hot all day than by
not keeping it hot all day. That would be nonsense. Think about it.

I'm not sneering, but like it or not, you're just wrong.

Rod.
--
Virtual Access V6.3 free usenet/email software from
http://sourceforge.net/projects/virtual-access/

On Mon, 13 Jul 2009 12:00:15 +0100, Kay Robinson
wrote:

Simply put, when I'm in all day I drink about 18 cups of tea during
that period. I have a wattmeter and placing this in the socket then
making my cups in the normal way ie switching on to heat enough for
that cup each time took the reading, I then filled the kettle and
leaving it on I went about my normal business,

I expect you have a lot of business to do, what with 18 cups a day.
Good God, I expect you keep the bog in permanent flush mode so you have
a stream of water going all day and this saves you from having to do a
full flush. That must save you water.

the kettle and found that the wattage used was some 50% less that the
previous method.

Wattage is like speed. You can't tell how far you've gone (distance is
like energy and therefore money) without considering time.

Now to me that's a saving.

To you, it's stupidity. You refuse to acknowledge several intelligent
people who have wasted their time on you trying to explain. Perhaps
we should all go "moo" at you instead. I guess you might understand then.

Naturally I don't leave it on all night nor when I'm going out for the
day.

Why the hell not? Surely if it saves you money during the day, it works at
night and when you're out just the same? FFS, how does the kettle know
the difference?

All the remarks, sneering, patronising or whatever don't detract from
the fact that I'm making some saving on my electric consumtion.

No you are not. I expect you're fat and ugly as well. You've certainly
got the first third.

Just not to lose sight of the point, it's the first one of those that
I had, and that I wrote a diatribe about because I thought it was
dangerous and, by only lasting a little over 2 years, barely if at all
eco-friendly.

On Tue, 14 Jul 2009 09:59:41 +0100, brightside S9
wrote:

There are kettles that boill the required amount of water for a cup /
mug on demand.

See http://www.carbonneutralfuel.co.uk/eco_kettles.html

======================================

Please always reply to news group as the email address in
this post's header does not exist. Alternatively, use one of the
contact addresses at:
http://www.macfh.co.uk/JavaJive/JavaJive.html
http://www.macfh.co.uk/Macfarlane/Macfarlane.html

"Paul Ratcliffe" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 13 Jul 2009 12:00:15 +0100, Kay Robinson

I expect you're fat and ugly as well.

Oh Paul!

Bill