|
Grex > Environment > #2: Whether to start a new Conference on environmentally friendly living. | |
|
| Author |
Message |
chi1taxi
|
|
Whether to start a new Conference on environmentally friendly living.
| 
Aug 15 01:35 UTC 1993 |
This is Chicago Taxi Willie. I started a discussion on Hippie Conference as
to whether it would be a good idea to start a conference on Environmentally
Friendly Living. Topics would include using public transportation (and
politicing to make it better, or starting bus co-ops), apartments, townhouses
and cluster houses vs. detached, heat the atmosphere, houses, and co-op
housing and co-op condominiums. The original entry is in Hippie #52, where
a little bit of a discussion of the issues has started, but no one has
commented on the question of whether to start a Conference on the subject.
Please address this last issue here on agora, put debate on issues on
Hippie #52. Thanks. My apologies, this should have gone on co-op
conference.
|
| 40 responses total. |
kentn
|
|
response 1 of 40:
|
Aug 15 23:06 UTC 1993 |
Do you feel that the "little bit" of discussion in Hippie #52 would
become a greater and more diverse discussion if there was a conference
with multiple items devoted to this subject?
|
chi1taxi
|
|
response 2 of 40:
|
Aug 16 01:24 UTC 1993 |
Some people don't read Hippie. I feel there are (or should be) enough people
out there who care enough about mother nature (and our own lungs and economy)
to support a distinct conference.
Chicago Taxi Willie
|
gregor
|
|
response 3 of 40:
|
Aug 16 03:41 UTC 1993 |
Chicago Taxi Wille must have leather lungs!
How about natural gas to power our vehivcles?
|
kentn
|
|
response 4 of 40:
|
Aug 16 14:38 UTC 1993 |
It sounds like an interesting idea, but I doubt that I'd participate
in such a conference.
|
steve
|
|
response 5 of 40:
|
Aug 16 15:44 UTC 1993 |
I'm willing to give it a try. It's certainly a different idea
for a conference.
|
chelsea
|
|
response 6 of 40:
|
Aug 17 21:49 UTC 1993 |
I'll be checking it out.
|
raven
|
|
response 7 of 40:
|
Aug 19 18:08 UTC 1993 |
I would be very much for said conf. I fair witness the earth conf over
at m-net, and i would participate activeley over here!
|
remmers
|
|
response 8 of 40:
|
Aug 25 01:29 UTC 1993 |
[Item 78 in summer agora is now linked as item 15 in Coop.]
|
dana
|
|
response 9 of 40:
|
Aug 30 20:24 UTC 1993 |
I thought environmentally friendly living was part of the idealized
`hippie' lifestyle. Is there enough activity on grex to support
such a specialized conference?
|
davel
|
|
response 10 of 40:
|
Aug 30 23:55 UTC 1993 |
We seem to be having a lot of splinter conferences lately, for some reason.
I think the answer is "maybe but I doubt it".
|
rcurl
|
|
response 11 of 40:
|
Aug 31 00:07 UTC 1993 |
Environmentally friendly living has nothing to do with hippies. It would
concern using the least resources to satisfy ones needs and wishes. There
is a great deal that individuals can do to "Waste Less, Want Less". This
need not be deprivation: anything you *like* doing can be done more
efficiently, use fewer resources, and leave more for the future. We just]
had a "high efficiency" (90%+) furnace installed in our house. We already
kept our winter temperature low, and eschewed A/C ( until this summer 8->).
We put our lights on X-10 controllers, which saves noticeablly on the
electric bill. I wish more could be recycled. If these are the subject
of the proposed conference, I am all for it.
|
kentn
|
|
response 12 of 40:
|
Aug 31 13:15 UTC 1993 |
Sort of a Mother Earth News conference...
|
hawkeye
|
|
response 13 of 40:
|
Aug 31 13:17 UTC 1993 |
Out of curiosity, what is an "X-10 Controller"?
|
kentn
|
|
response 14 of 40:
|
Aug 31 13:20 UTC 1993 |
A box that controls lights and appliances via modules that plug into
the house wiring system, allowing you to turn them on and off, dim the
lights, etc.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 15 of 40:
|
Sep 1 01:42 UTC 1993 |
X-10 is known in Radio Shack as "Plug'n'Power". One needs the computer
programmed interface to use the system to save electricity. You don't
have to remember to turn off the lights that are on the system. Also,
I run all the outside lights at 80% "dim", saving both watts and
extending the life of the bulbs.
|
hawkeye
|
|
response 16 of 40:
|
Sep 1 16:06 UTC 1993 |
I'm still not certain where you save your money. If you run your 100
watt bulbs at 80%, why not just replace them with 20 watt bulbs? Or
am I missing something here?
What does this X-10 controller do that you don't do anyway? If you
turn lights on when you enter a room and turn them off when you leave
normally, where would you save the electricity by having this system?
|
steve
|
|
response 17 of 40:
|
Sep 1 16:09 UTC 1993 |
Well, for one thing, 80w bulbs don't exist. And if you run a 100w
bulb at 80%, you can always turn it to brighter-than-normal use. With
an X-10 controller, you can time things more easily, and through an
interface control them from the telephone.
|
gregc
|
|
response 18 of 40:
|
Sep 1 16:10 UTC 1993 |
The system's intended purpose has nothing to do with energy conservation.
The X-10 system is for remote controll of 120vac lines. You replace your
wall switch, or wall outlet with an X-10 module. You can also get modules
that plug into existing wall outlets. They are designed to watch for a
carrier wave signal that is broadcast over the house wiring. You can
turn any so equiped light, on, off, dim to any brightness, turn all lights
on, turn everything off. You can also get many different control modules.
1 can be hooked up to a computer on a serial line, 1 is hooked to a phone
line. You can call in and turn things on and off.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 19 of 40:
|
Sep 1 17:14 UTC 1993 |
But the *effect* is energy conservation - because we could not remember to
always turn off all the outside lights in the morning, or even some of
the inside lights. It had a noticeable effect on our electric bill, which
is the "bottom line", for whatever reason. We use 62 watt outside lights -
you need minimum lighting for safety. Turning them down still provides
enough light, but extends the life of the bulb considerably. (I suppose
one way of expressing the energy savings is that it is the result of
the computer having more *discipline* than we do.)
|
kentn
|
|
response 20 of 40:
|
Sep 1 18:36 UTC 1993 |
Re:17, but 75W bulbs do exist. Close enuf. You really don't need to
automate everything if you can remember (and are willing) to turn things
on and off (and dimmers will dim lights just as easily). However, most
of us aren't so mechanical...like Rane says, computers have more discipline.
Besides, this is the couch potato era. You gotta have everything
controllable via a button nearby (or better yet, have your computer do
the thinking).
|
davel
|
|
response 21 of 40:
|
Sep 1 21:03 UTC 1993 |
Should this be moved to the environmentalism conference?
(sf sf)
|
remmers
|
|
response 22 of 40:
|
Sep 1 22:45 UTC 1993 |
Yes. The conf. is now up.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 23 of 40:
|
Sep 1 22:47 UTC 1993 |
Its not an energy saving matter - but the light control system continues
to function when everyone is away - a security bonus.
|
kentn
|
|
response 24 of 40:
|
Sep 1 23:49 UTC 1993 |
That's a definite plus.
|