Why are we paying for energy we don't need?

JJ_Egan

suzannebridges wrote: »

It's not an independent survey.
This is ongoing work across the UK by an independent organisation.
The evidence is available for anyone who wishes to see it.

But its flawed as this evidence is based upon very false assumptions .
As a new poster i really suspect tinned luncheon meat .
Independent survey but its not so therefore its part of a large nameless organization .
This whoever they are do not understand basic principals and therefore are in the business of selling a fake product to some gullible fools .

Richie-from-the-Boro

suzannebridges wrote: »

It's not an independent survey.
This is ongoing work across the UK by an independent organisation.
The evidence is available for anyone who wishes to see it.

- so who pays the piper, who is marketing what ?
- we will be happy to look at who pays for what hype !

Ebe_Scrooge

Yep, I'm really going to trust an independent company who plainly did not even manage to get O Level physics :rotfl:

martinsurrey

I always thought my electricity looked too big as I was looking down the electricity pipe!

thank you for the independent company data, I'm going to go and see my MP, I just need to find my tin foil hat before I leave the house.

Bark01

suzannebridges wrote: »

It's not an independent survey.
This is ongoing work across the UK by an independent organisation.
The evidence is available for anyone who wishes to see it.

Where can we see the evidence?

suzannebridges

It isn't a survey!!
The evidence is being presented at EMEX (at ExCel in London) this week.
Presumably those involved in the energy business will be there.

lstar337

suzannebridges wrote: »

Presumably those involved in the energy business will be there.

Yeah, they need a good laugh. :rotfl:

jamesperrett

How much of the electrical equipment in your house is actually affected by this? I think you'll find surprisingly little. Most electronic gear uses switch mode power supplies which consume the same amount of power over a wide range of voltage. Thermostatically controlled heaters and cookers will simply switch off sooner.

Only those still using old fashioned filament lamps and non thermostatically controlled heaters will be affected. Mind you - even professional building managers have been fooled by the voltage optimising hype.

malc_b

Even for filament lamps it wouldn't be a 248/220 effect as the larger voltage makes the filament hotter which increases its resistance so current is reduced. Only if the filament resistance didn't change would you get 248/220 effect.

I say effect, since the OP shows what they DON'T know by saying you save 12%. They can't even do the maths right. If we are talking about something like a heater which uses resistance wire designed to be stable then 248/220 is a 12% increase in voltage which gives a 12% increase in current and hence 25% increase in power (VxA), so therefore a 25% increase in bills, according to OP. Except of course if my electric heater, kettle, hob, etc. give out more heat then they switch off earlier and so use exactly the same power. Filament lamps would be somewhere in between 12% and 25% but you would be getting the designed light output (or a bit more). At 220V the bulb would be dim and rather yellow. And if you want to save money on bulbs there are better and obvious solutions.

Total tosh.

System

martinsurrey wrote: »

I just need to find my tin foil hat before I leave the house.

Do you realise how much energy gets used just to provide the tin foil for your hats? It takes a lot of energy to process bauxite.

Put a lump of pyrites on your head. No processing costs (you can dig it up yourself) and it works just as well. Only side effect is neck-ache