|
|
| Author |
Message |
| 14 new of 83 responses total. |
aruba
|
|
response 70 of 83:
| 
Jun 7 15:37 UTC 1999 |
Re #68: If someone is willing to commit to going to the dungeon at the same
time each month, that will work fine.
|
steve
|
|
response 71 of 83:
|
Jun 7 18:01 UTC 1999 |
Given the drop in current consumption from 8.9A to 7.5, we've saved roughly
161 watts of electricty. Given that a watt is juat about $1 per year, this
means we'll save about $161 a year. Since the UPS cost us $175, it will pay
for itself in just over one year. Its definitely cooler in the Pumpkin now,
which is another benefit.
|
janc
|
|
response 72 of 83:
|
Jun 7 19:36 UTC 1999 |
Actually, a slight irregularity in when we take the readings wouldn't
matter much, so long as we pay whatever it was since the last reading.
We might want to clear this procedure with Flying Dutchman before
changing the way we bill, just to avoid painful confusions.
|
aruba
|
|
response 73 of 83:
|
Jun 7 19:50 UTC 1999 |
Yeah, there's the rub. I'd rather the payments not be erratic, becuse the
last thing we want to do is annoy them.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 74 of 83:
|
Jun 8 04:40 UTC 1999 |
Does this include the room lights?
|
scott
|
|
response 75 of 83:
|
Jun 8 10:57 UTC 1999 |
The room lights are not included in the measurement.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 76 of 83:
|
Jun 8 14:26 UTC 1999 |
Are they included in the rent, then? Not that computers need light.
|
aruba
|
|
response 77 of 83:
|
Jun 8 14:49 UTC 1999 |
They were included in the rent under our old lease. I don't remember about
the new lease. I'll have to check unless someone else can remember. (Mary?)
|
keesan
|
|
response 78 of 83:
|
Jun 8 20:43 UTC 1999 |
I expect grex uses a lot less electricity for room lighting than some business
where someone is there every day. Jim suggests definitely calibrating the
meter, he cannot guarantee its accuracy, in fact it may have come his way
because it was not accurate.
|
drew
|
|
response 79 of 83:
|
Jun 8 20:53 UTC 1999 |
Room lights are easy to check - look at the bulb for the wattage.
100 watts worth of lightbulbs amounts to around 10% - maybe 11 or 12% - of
the equipment load IF left on all the time.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 80 of 83:
|
Jun 8 20:56 UTC 1999 |
I'd think you'd only need on 75 W compact flouorescent - which runs 20 W.
But my question really is whether we also need to measure and pay for
the lighting circuit as well as the outlet service. It's a minor matter,
though.
|
mary
|
|
response 81 of 83:
|
Jun 8 23:07 UTC 1999 |
Our lease says nothing about our paying for electricity. That issue was
simply left as a good-faith understanding with our landlord that we will
pay for what we use.
I believe all the other tenants in the building simply have their electric
bill bundled into their set monthly rent. I'd suggest that we not worry
about the overhead lighting as long as we aren't wasteful about leaving it
on when no one is there. The voiced concern on the part of our landlord
has been with our paying for what we plug-in and never turn off.
Mark asked me if I'd mind contacting Flying Dutchman about our using
metered readings to calculate our electric bill monthly. I'd be happy to
do this as soon as staff is confident the equipment works and our numbers
are accurate. I'd also like to offer that if there is any concern about
our metering setup we'd be happy to have her electrician check it out.
I think we need to do whatever we can to keep this good-faith
arrangement in good working order.
|
aruba
|
|
response 82 of 83:
|
Jun 9 03:50 UTC 1999 |
I agree, and I think that strategy is sound.
|
steve
|
|
response 83 of 83:
|
Jun 10 03:01 UTC 1999 |
The original agreement that I made with Bill VanFossen was to include only
the computer electricty, not the office lights and things. He expected the
normal amount of that; it was the watt hungry eqipment that made him nervous
which is why I suggested we pay for the computer part. He readily agreed to
that, and that is the original basis for the cost accounting we've done.
|