Renewables: "talking 'bout my generation"

legoman62

I'll stick with 0's.....well 1.1 of 'em today:D

The_Green_Hornet

I'll stick with publishing my monthly stats on PV Output and then leave it up to the individual viewer to pick which meaningless comparison figure they want (or don't want as the case may be).

http://pvoutput.org/aggregate.jsp?id=7259&sid=5821&v=0&t=m

InVestor_2

The_Green_Hornet wrote: »

Oh well each to their own. I wish you all the happiness in 2014 counting out your money.

I think your incredibly stupid if you think income is meaningless.

But as you say, each to their own....

InVestor_2

Oscargrouch wrote: »

How do you know that then ?

You may have switched the Cleaner on at the wrong time...:rotfl:

Why do you keep trying these pathetic childish digs?

Because I point out how meaningless the 'O' is? Really?

John_Pierpoint

8.81 kWh or 2,45 Os if you prefer on 2nd January best result since back in November.

Perhaps it was finishing the haircut on the willow tree that made the difference?

EricMears

The_Green_Hornet wrote: »

I'll stick with publishing my monthly stats on PV Output and then leave it up to the individual viewer to pick which meaningless comparison figure they want (or don't want as the case may be).

http://pvoutput.org/aggregate.jsp?id=7259&sid=5821&v=0&t=m

Precisely what I've been doing lately - unless something unusual happens.


The kWh/kWP ratio would be very useful in deciding which of two panels one might choose IF you had data available from two identical setups to compare. When you start comparing different installations that could be 500 miles apart where one is severely shaded but other not, panels face in different directions and at different inclinations (often unspecified) and one or both may have neglected to tell you exact type of panel, the ratio has all the utility of a chocolate fireguard !

The_Green_Hornet

InVestor wrote: »

I think your incredibly stupid if you think income is meaningless.

But as you say, each to their own....

Erm, I don't think I said that income was meaningless but you can interpret it any which way you like as I don't believe anyone is interested in your view on this particular thread.

By the way, if you are going to call someone stupid maybe you should check your spelling before you post at it diminishes the impact of your insult.

It is "I think you're incredibly stupid".

mickyduck

The_Green_Hornet wrote: »

Erm, I don't think I said that income was meaningless but you can interpret it any which way you like as I don't believe anyone is interested in your view on this particular thread.

By the way, if you are going to call someone stupid maybe you should check your spelling before you post at it diminishes the impact of your insult.

It is "I think you're incredibly stupid".

Love it..........

InVestor_2

The_Green_Hornet wrote: »

Erm, I don't think I said that income was meaningless but you can interpret it any which way you like as I don't believe anyone is interested in your view on this particular thread.

By the way, if you are going to call someone stupid maybe you should check your spelling before you post at it diminishes the impact of your insult.

It is "I think you're incredibly stupid".

It is grammar not spelling....

tunnel

4.4kWh or 0.676 O's today.


No more to say, I do't want the grammer and speling police picking on me too