Electricity prices to jump

Page 2 of 2  

wrote:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/02/28/BAVP1HUSUD.DTL&tsp=1
Think about it. A family of 5 will use perhaps 10 gallons flushing toilets (aka black water) but will use a lot more than that for washing (people, laundry, dishes etc often called gray water). So the reality 10 or 20 gallons of black water one way or the other won't make a bit of difference.
Parts of the country have one used recycled gray water for watering plants and grass. None of those areas seem to be reporting a problem with pushing sh|t down hill.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 5/28/2012 11:56 AM, NotMe wrote:

I had a thought that since San Francisco is on the coast, ocean water could be used to flush the sewer system. I lived on an island in the middle of The Pacific for a while and there were two water supplies for each building, one potable for drinking and one seawater to flush toilets. Of course I have no idea how a sewage treatment plant would handle salt water or if the treatment system would work with it. o_O
TDD
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Malcom "Mal" Reynolds wrote:

Giggle.
California also has twice the unemployment rate as Texas, ranks dead last in number of private sector jobs created (Texas is first), and has an unbelievable budget deficit while Texas has a surplus. Is ranked 40th in new residents (would be at the bottom if not for illegal immigrants) while Texas is at the top.
What power California DOES use costs significantly more than the equivalent killowatts in Texas.
And so on.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

none of which is the cause of lower per capita use.
I like the argument that Texas has higher per capita usage because of the extreme environment. of course Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico and Utah have just as extreme or worse environment have ower per capita usage than Texas

Not where I live...approx 10cents/kwh

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Malcom "Mal" Reynolds wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Malcom "Mal" Reynolds wrote:

Damn sure is. No jobs equals plants that use no power. Higher taxes mean that consumers save where they can, just to pay them. One way to save is to cut your power usage, that is, do without TV or the internet, drying your clothes on a backyard line, eating cold food (do you have to cook arugula?), don't run the vacuum, and so on. All because of taxes. And unemployment.

Who said anything about the environment? Still, we didn't build the first air-conditioned sports stadium to be ostentatious.

Good-o for you. Mine is 7.6 cents in Houston. Of course there are add-on fees... Also, Texas is not connected to the two national power grids. We're on our own, so to speak.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
HeyBub wrote:

I did.
And I'll provide further proof:
===========National Energy Technology laboratory
An Investigation into Californias Residential Electricity Consumption July 29, 2009
http://www.netl.doe.gov/energy-analyses/pubs/CA_US_elec_consumption_FINAL_July-29-2009.pdf
See Table 6 (page 18).
Table 6 shows differences between the US (excluding California) and California in the RECS data used in constructing the models. It also shows other basic statistics such as minimums, maximums, and standard deviations for each category in the U.S. and California.
California has much milder climate than the rest of the U.S., larger number of household members, smaller homes in terms of square footage, a higher cost per unit of electricity, and lower HEC (household electricity consumption). ========== Some key points from that study:
- Factors that are significant in predicting electricity consumption are income, average cost of electricity, size of the home, climate, and whether the home uses electricity for heating, cooling, cooking, and water.
- The estimates from the model with California interaction terms suggests that variables that may have significantly different effects between California and the rest of the U.S. are square footage, number of household members and whether a home uses electricity for cooking.
It seems that on a per-household basis, that California's electrcity use is 40% lower than the rest of the country, and roughly half of that amount can't be accounted for by various models even when climate is factored into account.
However, when you look at the numbers in Table 6, specifically the average heating-degree days, you see that the national average (excluding California) is 4,625, while California is 1,686. This is the largest difference in any metric or factor being studied.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/states/residential.cfm/state=AZ
AZ has over 20% more cooling-degree days than TX bust has approximately the same energy use.
Conservation?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Malcom "Mal" Reynolds wrote:

Humidity. Swamp coolers in Arizona work as well as A/C in Texas but use (I'm guessing) 1/10th the power.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

and that isn't conservation?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

swamp coolers?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The key to this is that per capita takes ALL electricity for ALL uses, gloms it together and divides by the number of people. **All** uses including industrial, etc. So, if you have high unemployment and closed factories that will impact on the demand per capita.
--
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative,
until patients started presenting with sexually
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Kurt Ullman wrote:

Hold on there.
From what I've read, California's low per-capita rate of electricity usage has been reported specifically for residential usage.
Whether or not commercial / industrial use on a "per facility" basis is also conspicuously low in California - I don't know. I haven't seen (nor looked) for those numbers.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Home Guy wrote:

Still, closed factories, even if their power usage is not part of the equation, result in higher unemployment. Higher unemployment, in turn, causes the unemployed to seek out all possible savings. One of these savings is power usage.
So, then, the unemployed cut because they must.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Per Capita energy use in California has been steadily decreasing for more than the last 30 years. Industry hasn't

I was repeating someone elses excuses

That's my total price after add-ons

Just imagine if your per capita usage was equivalent to California's, your power companies could be selling all that excess capacity (at high prices) to other states...if you were connected
And you are connected to the Mexican Grid
--

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Cras lobortis volutpat
commodo. Morbi lobortis, massa fringilla adipiscing suscipit, velit urna
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Malcom "Mal" Reynolds wrote:

We're also connected to the Eastern Grid in two places: One small area near Tyler, Texas and another small area next to the Oklahoma border. Both of these, and the Mexican connection, are miniscule and hardly worth mentioning.
As for selling power to other, more benighted and more regulated states, its far easier for the residents of those states to move to Texas. Some do.
I wouldn't want California's per-capita consumption because it comes with other consequences: unemployment and having to eat the bark off trees in the city parks.
No thanks.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

stealing city owned laxatives is illegal

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
The Daring Dufas wrote:

Um... I think tee-pees were covered with animal hides.
Now since killing animals is against nature, unless you find a LOT of freshly dead animals, you'll HAVE to live in caves -- or get wet when it rains.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 5/26/2012 3:08 PM, HeyBub wrote:

Like their distant ancestors the "Cave Liberals"? ^_^
TDD
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Site Timeline

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.