Posted by Mary Fisher on February 14, 2006, 9:58 pm
I was giving examples of the reasons many British people - in my
experience - give for not having energy saving devices. You must have come
They also say that what an individual does won'tmake any difference. I say
that at least I shan't have contributed as much to an energy depleted future
as I would have done had I continued just using it without thought.
Which is what you said above, as I read it.
Posted by John Beardmore on February 15, 2006, 11:21 pm
Generally seems to come down to cost, but yes, there are some
contradictions in peoples behaviours around car ownership in particular.
:) Compatible with anyway.
Posted by Josh Hill on February 18, 2006, 2:25 pm
On Tue, 14 Feb 2006 17:51:31 -0000, "Mary Fisher"
Sad, isn't it? But when I talk about payback, I do so because a lot of
people have stretched budgets and can't afford to pay higher bills,
particularly with energy prices so high, or they're looking for relief
from those oppressive prices; and I figure that even those who don't
care about the planet's future care about their pocketbooks.
"President Washington, President Lincoln, President Wilson, President Roosevelt
all authorized electronic surveillance on a far broader scale." - Alberto
Posted by raebon57 on February 12, 2006, 5:33 pm
I do not have solor in my house, but I am investigating this option.
What I have found is that you do not need batteries. You put your solar
panels up, conecting it to your house. You also have it conected to a
unit that all excess energy produced that you are not using, you sell
it back to your power company. So they could owe you money instead of
ou owing them.
Posted by SJC on February 12, 2006, 6:01 pm
Yes, it is call net metering. In California residents may not be allowed
to make more than they use, but on an anual basis they can reduce their