It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Power Saving

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 28 2005 @ 05:46 AM
link   
With resources raipdly running sparce we need to start saving our energy. What would you create and make a must for every household in the fight to save power.

At my college we havel lightbulbs that automatically flick off after a certain period of time, i.e one hour. I think that if these were fitted standard into every household it would help save so much power. They could be placed on TV's to turn off when they have been on standby for more than 30 mins, lights, fans, radio's etc.

What would you introduce?

[edit on 28-5-2005 by phixion]




posted on May, 28 2005 @ 07:06 AM
link   
Substitution of flourscent light bulbs made a noticable difference on kw hrs.

Talk to anyone from Kansas about selling power back to the power company.
www.motherearthnews.com...



posted on May, 28 2005 @ 07:14 AM
link   
Interesting article.

I don't believe things will change until we need to change. The majority of the population is too lazy or too undereducated to do anything now, the time when we need to be doing something. People are content at the moment and i'm sure only a small percentage of the population is actually aware that we're going to need to start saving power sooner or later.



posted on May, 28 2005 @ 01:25 PM
link   
Bah Florescent lights don't last long enough. LED lightbulbs are almost ready for the market, and they have a life expectancy of over 200,000 hours(around the same as a CRT television)

www.worldchanging.com...

AND if it were mandated by building code then we could cut our power consumption by a considerable amount, up to 15 % I believe.

[edit on 28-5-2005 by sardion2000]



posted on May, 29 2005 @ 01:42 AM
link   
Are we truly in such an emergency position of power saving that we need to change our lightbulbs just to save it...

In fact, I wasn't even aware that we needed to save power.

But if we do, I don't think that the modern person should be changing lightbulbs to accomplish it. This, may partly be because I've never really noticed lightbulbs absorbing alot of power. My computer and its accessories absorb about as much energy as most of the rest of my house. Many companies have hundreds, if not thousands of computers set up. I may be missing the point here, but if we need to save power, I see better targets than the common lightbulb. Good post though.

Omniscient.

EDIT: I agree, I don't think that things will change until a change is needed.

Omniscient.

[edit on 29-5-2005 by Omniscient]



posted on May, 29 2005 @ 08:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Omniscient
In fact, I wasn't even aware that we needed to save power.
[edit on 29-5-2005 by Omniscient]


www.powerhousekids.com...



posted on May, 29 2005 @ 12:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by sardion2000
Bah Florescent lights don't last long enough. LED lightbulbs are almost ready for the market, and they have a life expectancy of over 200,000 hours(around the same as a CRT television)


Exactly what I was gonna say.
LEDs are starting to be used for more and more things now, like street lights and my Binary clock (
). I'll put down money saying they'll be the way we go in a decade or so.



posted on Jun, 1 2005 @ 12:46 AM
link   
I hate to sound stupid, or even ignorant, but what are the basic difference between flurecent and LED lights?

I think that if looking to save evergy, the light bulb is the last of our worries.



posted on Jun, 1 2005 @ 06:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Disaster_Boy
I hate to sound stupid, or even ignorant, but what are the basic difference between flurecent and LED lights?

I think that if looking to save evergy, the light bulb is the last of our worries.


www.technologyreview.com...

How many scientists does it take to change a light bulb?

None. They are smart enough to use fluorescent bulbs that almost never need changing.



posted on Jun, 1 2005 @ 12:56 PM
link   
Yes, but what do light bulbs have to do with power saving...There are things that use WAY more energy than lightbulbs that are in common everyday homes...



posted on Jun, 1 2005 @ 01:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Omniscient
Yes, but what do light bulbs have to do with power saving...There are things that use WAY more energy than lightbulbs that are in common everyday homes...


Lightbulbs account for 15 % of our energy usage you know. Maybe more, Incandecent Bulbs are very inefficient, try touching one after it's been on for more then 20 minutes
LED's barely get hot(Heat = Wasted Energy). If every household in Canada were to switch to LED lighting it would take care of our Kyoto Requirements.




en.wikipedia.org...
* LEDs are capable of emitting lights of an intended color without the use of color filters that traditional lighting methods use.
* The shape of the LED package allows light to be focused. Incandescent and fluorescent sources often require an external reflector to collect light and direct it in a useable manner.
* LEDs are built inside solid cases that protect them, making them hard to break and extremely durable
* LEDs have an extremely long life span, twice longer than the best fluorescent bulbs and twenty times longer than the best incandescent bulbs.





en.wikipedia.org...
Most typical LEDs are designed to operate with no more than 30-60 milliwatts of electrical power. Around 1999, commercial LEDs capable of continuous use at one watt of input power were introduced. These LEDs used much larger semiconductor die sizes to handle the large power input. As well, the semiconductor dies were mounted to metal slugs to allow for heat removal from the LED die. In 2002, 5-watt LEDs were available with efficiencies of 18-22 lumens per watt. It is projected that by 2005, 10-watt units will be available with efficiencies of 60 lumens per watt. These devices will produce about as much light as a common 50-watt incandescent bulb, and will facilitate use of LEDs for general illumination needs.

In September 2003 a new type of blue LED was demonstrated by the company Cree, Inc. to have 35% efficiency at 20 mA. This produced a commercially packaged white light having 65 lumens per watt at 20 mA, becoming the brightest white LED commercially available at the time.

Today, OLEDs operate at substantially lower efficiency than inorganic (crystaline) LEDs. The best efficiency of an OLED so far is about 10%. These promise to be much cheaper to fabricate than inorganic LEDs, and large arrays of them can be deposited on a screen using simple printing methods to create a color graphic display so there are compensating benefits


[edit on 1-6-2005 by sardion2000]



posted on Jun, 1 2005 @ 09:09 PM
link   
Wow, 15% that's alot. I was thinking about this thread a bit today, and if central cooling takes alot of energy, as it does in my house, then there could be ways to save electricity there. I try not to keep all of my electronics on in my room anymore, as when I do, after about 10 minutes of the door being closed, they let off enough to heat to raise the temperature in my room by about 5-10 degrees. Then the AC constantly stays on, and it wastes a considerable amount of energy, especially since my room never gets cooler...just thought I'd add...

Omniscient.



posted on Jun, 1 2005 @ 09:19 PM
link   
Yes in the south that is a BIG drain on electricity. There are newer more effiecient models in development right now and higher efficiency ones are on the market right now that do not use ozone depleting CFCs, they use Greenhouse emitting HFC's
but they ARE more effiencient. Another one is to make sure you house is completely insulated with top of the line materials, hopefully Aerogel will become cheap enough for that purpose.



Another big drain is your washer and dryer, for 2000 cnd dollars you can get ones 3 times more efficient then ones made back in the 70s and 80s.

Look for the EnergyStar sticker on your appliances, that is a good yardstick to tell wether your appliances are up to snuff.

Okay here is a little quiz, what is more enviro-friendly to use. A Toaster Oven or a Microwave?

[edit on 1-6-2005 by sardion2000]



posted on Jun, 1 2005 @ 09:37 PM
link   
Ex-Gubenatorial candidate of NY State is against wind powered turbines in upstate NY because of the way they look..give me a break!!

And I know it's slightly off topic but I thought of this when I read your post. We need all the help we can get with energy and look what this guy says. Personally I think they are far out looking..Kinda neat. And they are much larger than they appear to be....rather otherworldly if you see them in person!

[edit on 6/1/2005 by mercury19]



posted on Jun, 1 2005 @ 09:41 PM
link   


rather otherworldly if you see them in person!


Ya tell me about it! We have one(yeah just one) in Toronto and its fricken huge(and for the record only something like 5 birds have been confirmed killed by the thing in its 3 years of operation) and it is almost silent and produces an average amount of electricity to power up to 200 homes per year!

mercury19, care to take a crack on my quiz question?



posted on Jun, 1 2005 @ 11:00 PM
link   
I think the toaster oven uses more energy. I don't believe they sell LED lights at Wal-Mart do they? I would gladly switch out to these if they are as efficient as you have posted.



posted on Jun, 1 2005 @ 11:53 PM
link   
I think we are already being conditioned for the shortages, I saw a 'commercial' the other day on some cable channel that reccomended baking at low temperatures, I mean like low 180-250. They said it was better for your food or some silliness. Odd thing about it that caught my eye was it wasn't a commercial for any particular product, or service, it was just some thirty second slot of a lady telling you to use lower oven temps.




top topics



 
0

log in

join