Houston we have problem

[gaelic cowboy]

I have found myself unable to sympathise with the enviromentalists when they tell us to "turn off your needless lights" when I am surrounded by shops that keep thiers at supernova after closing time, and even at 3 AM. I have yet to hear anyone propose a nighttime blackout on the highstreets.

Thats simply answered by a bit of common sense in reality.

How many shops are there where you live and by how much are they outnumbered by residential dwellings.

What year were said residential dwellings and business mostly constructed in the same area.

These two questions will answer a lot of your concerns.

[Vuk]

Thats simply answered by a bit of common sense in reality.

How many shops are there where you live and by how much are they outnumbered by residential dwellings.

What year were said residential dwellings and business mostly constructed in the same area.

These two questions will answer a lot of your concerns.

Questions do not provide answers, they only demand more.
You realize it is all BS don't you? Two of my bros are electrical power engineering technicians, and they told me that when power plants are looking at how much power they need to generate, they do not even take residential usage into account because it is so insignificant. The vast majority (I don't know off-hand how much, but my guess is well over 95%) of power generated is used for industrial purposes, and then stepped-down for residential usage. Have your lights on all day, don't have 'em on at all; it makes no difference. The entire amount of power that is generated for non-industrial use is completely insignificant.

If you wanted to save energy, you would have to do it on the manufacturing and industrial side of things. That is where real power is used, and if you wanted to make any real change, that is where you would start. Of course no one ever tells you that the environmental impact of producing something like a Prius instead of, say, a gasoline powered Focus far out-weighs the difference in environmental impact of running them.
The largest environmental impact is not made by the consumer, but the producer. If you wanted to lessen your impact on the environment, you focus on buying things that were produced with the smallest environmental impact. For instance, over the long term, standard incandescent light bulbs have a lot less impact on the environment than modern ones. Why? The manufacturing. Have you ever taken one of those things apart? Chip boards, diodes, inductors, capacitors, etc, etc. You gotta use your brain. Most of the environmentally friendly BS out there, actually has a much bigger impact on the environment being produced, for small savings being used. They normally do not last as long, and therefore many more have to be produced in the same time period, making them have an even greater environmental impact.

Of course all of this is neither here nor there, as the entire problem we are trying to solve is not a problem. It is amusing, nonetheless, to see idiots running around like chickens with their heads cut off trying to solve a none existent problem, and accomplishing the exact opposite of what they intend.

[Ironside]

Questions do not provide answers, they only demand more.
You realize it is all BS don't you? Two of my bros are electrical power engineering technicians, and they told me that when power plants are looking at how much power they need to generate, they do not even take residential usage into account because it is so insignificant. The vast majority (I don't know off-hand how much, but my guess is well over 95%) of power generated is used for industrial purposes, and then stepped-down for residential usage. Have your lights on all day, don't have 'em on at all; it makes no difference. The entire amount of power that is generated for non-industrial use is completely insignificant.

Wiki gives your vast majority to about 25% and shrinking (compare to about 40% in Sweden). Comercial use is only slighty less than residential use though, about 30% compared to 35%.
Your bros might be working in an extremely heavy industrial area, but national data is different.

[gaelic cowboy]

Questions do not provide answers, they only demand more.

I trusted that Greyblades had the ability to figure the answer for himself as he was clever enough to spot the inconsistency in the first place.

You realize it is all BS don't you?

IT???? the entire observable universe encompassing all matter and energy created many billions of years ago, or just the idea of climate change or just the human ability to cause any.

Two of my bros are electrical power engineering technicians, and they told me that when power plants are looking at how much power they need to generate, they do not even take residential usage into account because it is so insignificant. The vast majority (I don't know off-hand how much, but my guess is well over 95%) of power generated is used for industrial purposes, and then stepped-down for residential usage. Have your lights on all day, don't have 'em on at all; it makes no difference. The entire amount of power that is generated for non-industrial use is completely insignificant.

Power companies most certainly take residential power into account otherwise no one could have a coffee during the first add break of a new simpsons episode.

If you wanted to save energy, you would have to do it on the manufacturing and industrial side of things. That is where real power is used, and if you wanted to make any real change, that is where you would start. Of course no one ever tells you that the environmental impact of producing something like a Prius instead of, say, a gasoline powered Focus far out-weighs the difference in environmental impact of running them.

Actually they do tell us because it is one of the most quoted facts people spout on the internet in relation to energy use.

Let me be clear here there is NO free energy and certainly no production without some kind of carbon release. Often it's downstream and sometimes it is upstream but somewhere in a products lifecycle there is carbon release.

The largest environmental impact is not made by the consumer, but the producer. If you wanted to lessen your impact on the environment, you focus on buying things that were produced with the smallest environmental impact. For instance, over the long term, standard incandescent light bulbs have a lot less impact on the environment than modern ones. Why? The manufacturing. Have you ever taken one of those things apart? Chip boards, diodes, inductors, capacitors, etc, etc. You gotta use your brain. Most of the environmentally friendly BS out there, actually has a much bigger impact on the environment being produced, for small savings being used. They normally do not last as long, and therefore many more have to be produced in the same time period, making them have an even greater environmental impact.

As a mechanical engineer I am well aware of where large energy use occurs in our society, has it occured to you that consumerism is the cause of overly large industrial footprints. Industry wouldnt need such huge energy if they didnt have to make many of the items we crave, our consumption is the cause of the carbon release by the producer for the consumer.

Your point about the energy saving bulbs while well made misses the point that the aim here is to efficiently use the energy for the same output. This will mean the power company pollutes less for the same amount of lights left on. An incandessant bulb is simple but it is wasteful of energy, that doesnt mean there are not reasons to use incandessant bulbs though.


The point should always be to asses your consumption of energy and draw up a plan and to make changes based on that, select the proper tools or systems of use required to achieve the goal.

[Greyblades]

Thats simply answered by a bit of common sense in reality.

How many shops are there where you live and by how much are they outnumbered by residential dwellings.

What year were said residential dwellings and business mostly constructed in the same area.

These two questions will answer a lot of your concerns.

Ok I understand the first one, number of housing and subsiquent power usage far outweighs number of shops but the second confuses me.
Also it doesnt really help much seeing as these 9-5 shops have thier lights on at full blast, all night, for no apparant reason, the only one I could think of is attracting attention for advertisment purposes and that really becomes moot after midnight.

[rvg]

Ok I understand the first one, number of housing and subsiquent power usage far outweighs number of shops but the second confuses me.
Also it doesnt really help much seeing as these 9-5 shops have thier lights on at full blast, all night, for no apparant reason, the only one I could think of is attracting attention for advertisment purposes and that really becomes moot after midnight.

Just because they are wasting energy, it does not obligate you to follow suit. There's really no good reason to burn lights if *you* don't need them.

[Greyblades]

I dont, generally, I feel like somethings gone wrong when I'm yelled at for not turning off my energy saver lightbulb in the livingroom every now and then, when noones commenting on the 200+ mini spotlights lighting up clearly empty shops at the dead of night.

[rvg]

I dont, yet I fail to see the distiction between my energy saver lightbulb in the livingroom I'm constantly reminded to turn off and the 200+ industrial spotlights lighting up clearly empty shops, especially when its me getting yelled at.

You're not getting yelled at. The appeal is made to the public, because public is directly in control of their power usage. There are no CEO, no management to consult with. You are in control of your switch. Your contribution however small *will* make a difference. Gotta start somewhere.

[Greyblades]

Wait, they're buisnesses, there's almost by definition a CEO to consult with. So why arent they getting pettitioned to turned thier lights off?

[rvg]

Wait, they're buisnesses, there's almost by definition a CEO to consult with. So why arent they getting pettitioned to turned thier lights off?

Why does it matter?

[gaelic cowboy]

I dont, generally, I feel like somethings gone wrong when I'm yelled at for not turning off my energy saver lightbulb in the livingroom every now and then, when noones commenting on the 200+ mini spotlights lighting up clearly empty shops at the dead of night.

If I had to guess there probably LED downlights basically only a couple of watts at most. 4 maybe 5 watt instead of 40 or 50 watt halogen

[Tellos Athenaios]

If I had to guess there probably LED downlights basically only a couple of watts at most. 4 maybe 5 watt instead of 40 or 50 watt halogen

Quite. It's all about the amps, anyway and most of these lights work with small currents. (An indication LED needs about 10mA for instance, which is still a lot.)

For instance large neon signs don't require particularly much power, they work similar to LED's only at much bigger voltages. So if you have a neon sign which operates at 10-20kV voltage, and assuming current draw is about the same as an indication LED (surely wrong but you get the point) then that's still only 10-20W of power.

[gaelic cowboy]

Ok I understand the first one, number of housing and subsiquent power usage far outweighs number of shops but the second confuses me.
Also it doesnt really help much seeing as these 9-5 shops have thier lights on at full blast, all night, for no apparant reason, the only one I could think of is attracting attention for advertisment purposes and that really becomes moot after midnight.

I was thinking in terms of what construction techniques were used, is there insulation in the walls or the copper tank, did they follow good plans for natural light etc etc. Is it of brick, block or even massed concrete construction they all have different energy needs to run as a building.

I agree it is annoying to see lights on all night but then your coming to a situtation of work out for energy in, is the energy used properly and has it been used in a way that paid for itself. (efficiently)