Kill-O-Watt readings for HTPC

[thomaszoo]

Originally Posted by Fuzzy

HD200? no. But the HD300 supposedly added this feature.

I have two HD300s and yes, they do wake the server. I also have two HD100s that don't, but they aren't used as much. If I want to use my web app on my Android phone I have a WOL app installed that can wake the server (if necessary) from anywhere I happen to be.

Wayne

[perf]

On the positive side: If you live in a cold climate, the power consumed by your HTPC is not lost - it decreases your heating bill!!

(Especially if you have electric heating as many do in Scandinavia - then it is actually a wash.)

(On a side note - this is why using energy-saving light-bulbs is meaningless for many people in Scandinavia.)

/Per

[Fuzzy]

Originally Posted by perf

On the positive side: If you live in a cold climate, the power consumed by your HTPC is not lost - it decreases your heating bill!!

(Especially if you have electric heating as many do in Scandinavia - then it is actually a wash.)

(On a side note - this is why using energy-saving light-bulbs is meaningless for many people in Scandinavia.)

/Per

On the negative side: If you live in a warm climate, the power consumed by your HTPC needs to then be removed by your air conditioning, increasing your cooling bill by about 20-30% (depending on the efficiency of your system) of the extra heat added to the house. :-)

[tvmaster2]

Originally Posted by Fuzzy

There are a LOT of different climates in Southern California. As for solar in california, it is a lot more attractive here, but more so because of the sun strength than the electric rates. Each given square foot of panel is going to produce a considerable more amount of sun over the year than other areas of the country. As for the tiered rates, if you install solar, you will most likely be better off switching to a time-of-day rate, where daytime usage/generation is charged at a peak rate, and nightime usage is charged at a much lower rate.

SDGE's rates go from .07 cents per kwh, up to .23 per kwh. The crime is that those .23 cent rates kick in after ONLY 212 kwh's per month.
I guess if I disconnected my fridge, freezer and kitchen lighting, I MAY get down to that level. As it stands now, two people use 1,000 kwh's per month, and I have no idea how to get it down to 212 per month.
Insane cash-grab by PRIVATE utility company.

[Fuzzy]

I can't speak for SDGE, but SCE has Time of use metering as an option. runs between 7-15¢/kWh off-peak, and 15-31¢/kWh on-peak. This works great for solar users, as their peak usage is usually near 0, as that's the most sun portions of the day.

As for the 'cash-grab'... cash-grab's are what you start businesses for. You don't HAVE to use 1000kWh a month. Trust me, it's not your fridge, freezer and kitchen lighting getting you there. The average modern refrigerator uses <400kWh a YEAR (33kWh/month). My sage/network server complex, on the other hand, uses about 3000kWh/year (250kWh/month) - and that's not counting the 3 61" DLP and 2 32"LCD's. I can't/you shouldn't expect the PUC to consider entertainment equipment in figuring their 'baseline' electrical usages.

[tvmaster2]

Originally Posted by Fuzzy

I can't speak for SDGE, but SCE has Time of use metering as an option. runs between 7-15¢/kWh off-peak, and 15-31¢/kWh on-peak. This works great for solar users, as their peak usage is usually near 0, as that's the most sun portions of the day.

As for the 'cash-grab'... cash-grab's are what you start businesses for. You don't HAVE to use 1000kWh a month. Trust me, it's not your fridge, freezer and kitchen lighting getting you there. The average modern refrigerator uses <400kWh a YEAR (33kWh/month). My sage/network server complex, on the other hand, uses about 3000kWh/year (250kWh/month) - and that's not counting the 3 61" DLP and 2 32"LCD's. I can't/you shouldn't expect the PUC to consider entertainment equipment in figuring their 'baseline' electrical usages.

interesting about the solar. I think I read recently that it only takes six years to recoup your solar investment if you live in New Jersey, but 15 years in California. Does that make sense? Doesn't to me - I wonder if I read it wrong.
And I respectfully disagree that a family of four, likely with three or four televisions, two or three computers, a DVR and various other cell phone/cable devices SHOULD be able to count on entertainment (or information, since that's where most people get their news) as part of the baseline limit.
At least 600 kwh should be near the baseline price. Electric water heaters, washing machines, dryers, hair dryers, stoves, etc. No way all that goes for under 212 kwh hours.
Electricity has gone WAY beyond a "profit" device. It's a necessary service. Do you really believe otherwise?

[tmiranda]

Originally Posted by davephan

It does get hot and humid in Minnesota in the summer at times. Not all summer, but it can happen for many weeks during the summer. The temperatures can be quite extreme from the winters to the summers in the northern plains of the US. We live on a small lake, so we have a micro-climate in the back yard near the lake that is cooler than the surrounding area. However, on really hot and humid days, it is unbearable even by the lake. Some areas in Minnesota near Lake Superior are rarely hot, since Lake Superior acts like a giant air conditioner. Lake Superior is deep and the lake is in the upper 30's or low 40's all year round, much cooler than our small lake.

Minnesota has a reputation for being cold and snowy most of the year, but the summers can be very hot and humid for many weeks of the summer. There are some spectacular summer days too, low humidity with 60 - 80 degree temperatures. I seem to be stuck at work during many of those really nice days. In the past 15 years, the winters have been much less severe than it used to be about 25 to 50 years ago. You might need the air conditioning in the Minneapolis - St Paul area about 50 - 60 days during the summer. Although we have had cooler summers where we didn't have to use the air conditioning much during a summer, but that's a pretty rare year.

Dave

Obviously I was joking. I actually have several clients in MN (Mostly around the Eden Prare (sp?) area) who tell me the same thing.

[Fuzzy]

Originally Posted by tvmaster2

interesting about the solar. I think I read recently that it only takes six years to recoup your solar investment if you live in New Jersey, but 15 years in California. Does that make sense? Doesn't to me - I wonder if I read it wrong.
And I respectfully disagree that a family of four, likely with three or four televisions, two or three computers, a DVR and various other cell phone/cable devices SHOULD be able to count on entertainment (or information, since that's where most people get their news) as part of the baseline limit.
At least 600 kwh should be near the baseline price. Electric water heaters, washing machines, dryers, hair dryers, stoves, etc. No way all that goes for under 212 kwh hours.
Electricity has gone WAY beyond a "profit" device. It's a necessary service. Do you really believe otherwise?

I believe a PORTION of it is a necessary thing... and that is easily covered in the lower baseline (refrigeration, lighting, communication, heat and ventilation - not necessarily air conditioning). Anything above that is not a need, but a want. Either way, the baseline is determined based on average usage in the geographic area. The baseline is set at 50-60% of the average home usage in a given area. The idea for this is to encourage conservation, and those that choose to push their usage down to the 60% of average level, get benefited with cheaper rates.

Also not sure where you are getting the 212kWh, as the LOWEST baseline in SDGE's area is 9.6kWh/day (summer, coastal, gas available), with is about 288kWh/month. This ranges up to 22kWh/day (winter, desert, no-gas), which is 660kWh/month.

Things like electric water heaters, electric dryers, electric heat, etc are taken into consideration by the fact that if you DON'T have gas available, the baseline is higher to compensate.

[Fuzzy]

And don't go griping about some sort of 'money grab'. It could be a lot worse. Can you think of any other business where a majority of that business's advertising is encouraging customers to purchase less of their product?

[tchapin]

In MA, we use approx 750kWh in the summer (w/ central air) and a low of around 400kWh in the winter (gas furnace). Our average is probably around 500kWh.

I Kill-a-watted my server and it pulls approx 100W I think.

[TechBill]

I been into renewable energy for years so I know few stuff about it.

Reason our current solar panels does not have a good ROI "return of investment" because it only around 18% efficiency and have short life term about 15-20 years before it need to replaced.

But we have a new solar in the work called nanosolar which higher efficiency I think around 40% or so and lifespan with at least 25 and plus years so it would produce a much better ROI.

Also it suppose to be cheaper to manfacture because they can print it out like if they were printing on a roll of paper instead of having to paint it on like the older solar and it more flexiable to withstand enivormental abuses.

You can read on about nanosolar at http://www.nanosolar.com/



Bill

[Opus4]

Originally Posted by TechBill

I been into renewable energy for years so I know few stuff about it.

Reason our current solar panels does not have a good ROI "return of investment" because it only around 18% efficiency and have short life term about 15-20 years before it need to replaced.

Almost every solar panel I looked at has a 25 year warranty (I think some were 30 yr) -- they all mean that they guarantee the panels will still output 80% of their initial power rating after 25 years; 90% after 10 or 12 years.

18% efficiency is currently one of the best ratings available - SunPower has 18% & 19% efficient panels. I'm not sure if anyone else matches that (some Sanyo panels might), but they were not included in what we looked at.

SunPower panels are more expensive than less efficient panels, but the extra cost can be worth it if the available space for the installation is limited. With unlimited space, a cheaper panel wins because a watt of power is still a watt of power. The more expensive panel's watt won't run your electronics any better.

But we have a new solar in the work called nanosolar which higher efficiency I think around 40% or so and lifespan with at least 25 and plus years so it would produce a much better ROI.

I would be curious where you saw the 40% efficiency rating. My panels aren't installed yet & if we missed something, I would love to hear about it. Was this for a future product? The Nanosolar site you linked to included a spec sheet that shows their panels are much larger than SunPower panels, for example, and produce less electricity, so I don't see how they could be anywhere near 18% efficient. Further Google searching resulted in some sites talking about Nanosolar having efficiency ratings in the 9% range; other sites mentioned 13-16%.

So, I'm not sure what their efficiency really is, but it doesn't appear to be 40%... again, unless you are referring to a future product that I did not see mentioned. I saw plenty of comments talking about them producing their panels at less cost.

The only thing I found when searching for 40% and Nanosolar together is their claim to reduce the mounting costs by 40%.

I tried searching for 40% efficient solar panels & mostly saw comments about research panels & satellite panels (where small/efficient panels are really important, regardless of cost!), but I didn't find anything referring to anything installable on buildings/etc.

- Andy

[tvmaster2]

Originally Posted by Fuzzy

And don't go griping about some sort of 'money grab'. It could be a lot worse. Can you think of any other business where a majority of that business's advertising is encouraging customers to purchase less of their product?

do you think that fact is mandated by the state? And, being a monopoly whose product is one that nearly 100% of the population can't do without leaves me with little sympathy. Sorry. If there were four other utilities I could choose from, then, well . . . but there aren't. My rates have doubled in 10 years. Have their employees salaries?

You're correct, I misread my bill: baseline is 303 kwh, at .07387 cents per. 4th tier is .22873 cents per.

[TechBill]

Originally Posted by Opus4

Almost every solar panel I looked at has a 25 year warranty (I think some were 30 yr) -- they all mean that they guarantee the panels will still output 80% of their initial power rating after 25 years; 90% after 10 or 12 years.

18% efficiency is currently one of the best ratings available - SunPower has 18% & 19% efficient panels. I'm not sure if anyone else matches that (some Sanyo panels might), but they were not included in what we looked at.

SunPower panels are more expensive than less efficient panels, but the extra cost can be worth it if the available space for the installation is limited. With unlimited space, a cheaper panel wins because a watt of power is still a watt of power. The more expensive panel's watt won't run your electronics any better.

I would be curious where you saw the 40% efficiency rating. My panels aren't installed yet & if we missed something, I would love to hear about it. Was this for a future product? The Nanosolar site you linked to included a spec sheet that shows their panels are much larger than SunPower panels, for example, and produce less electricity, so I don't see how they could be anywhere near 18% efficient. Further Google searching resulted in some sites talking about Nanosolar having efficiency ratings in the 9% range; other sites mentioned 13-16%.

So, I'm not sure what their efficiency really is, but it doesn't appear to be 40%... again, unless you are referring to a future product that I did not see mentioned. I saw plenty of comments talking about them producing their panels at less cost.

The only thing I found when searching for 40% and Nanosolar together is their claim to reduce the mounting costs by 40%.

I tried searching for 40% efficient solar panels & mostly saw comments about research panels & satellite panels (where small/efficient panels are really important, regardless of cost!), but I didn't find anything referring to anything installable on buildings/etc.

- Andy

I was watching a show about it on Green channel or maybe Science channel, can't remember which and they were talking about future renewable enegry and this nanosolar was one of the topic of that show I saw. And they were talking about how much more better efficient it is over present solar panels by large margins

Also that show I saw was like some time ago maybe a year when nanosolar was just a new discovered thing and perhaps they haven't really test the efficent until now and found out that they guess too high at first and it actually lot lower than their expectation when they put it to a field test. But they did say it is a lot cheaper to produce over the currect panels today.

That also talked about how future solar like nanosolar could be part of building material like roofing shingles instead of a seperate item that is mounted on a roof etc.


Bill

[tvmaster2]

Originally Posted by Wayneb

I live in So. California in a rural area, I used to have propane for the stove, water heater and furnace. I got tired of the high propane prices and switched to all electric appliances and a wood stove. I called So Cal Edison up and told them I switched my house to all elecric and they sent out a worker to check out my house, they then raised my baseline to 915KWH for this time of year and even though my KWH use increased by 400KWH a month my electric bill dropped quite right now.

so your baseline is 915kwh per month!!!? how do I get in on that action?

[Fuzzy]

Originally Posted by tvmaster2

do you think that fact is mandated by the state? And, being a monopoly whose product is one that nearly 100% of the population can't do without leaves me with little sympathy. Sorry. If there were four other utilities I could choose from, then, well . . . but there aren't. My rates have doubled in 10 years. Have their employees salaries?

You're correct, I misread my bill: baseline is 303 kwh, at .07387 cents per. 4th tier is .22873 cents per.

The point is that 100% of the population can't do without the .07 kWh, they don't need the .22 kWh. That's the whole point of the teired system, allow people to get their needs satisfied affordably, but still allow the companies to be profitable. Hint: they wouldn't be in business if they had to sell all their power at .07.

Originally Posted by tvmaster2

so your baseline is 915kwh per month!!!? how do I get in on that action?

move to the desert.

[Bagal]

Originally Posted by tvmaster2

SDGE's rates go from .07 cents per kwh, up to .23 per kwh. The crime is that those .23 cent rates kick in after ONLY 212 kwh's per month.

That's interesting, over in the UK it tends to be the opposite, you pay more for the first so many kwh's and then after that the price goes down, looking at my current Electric bill (for Dec and Jan) I paid 22.77p for the first 146 kwh and then 9.925p for everything after that.

[stanger89]

Maybe you guys are still building power plants?

[tvmaster2]

Originally Posted by Fuzzy

The point is that 100% of the population can't do without the .07 kWh, they don't need the .22 kWh. That's the whole point of the teired system, allow people to get their needs satisfied affordably, but still allow the companies to be profitable. Hint: they wouldn't be in business if they had to sell all their power at .07.

Really? Funny that the "socialists" to the north seem to be able to make a profit at .09 cents max. Fascinating.

http://www.hydroone.com/TOU/Pages/default.aspx

...or maybe I'm reading that wrong.

or, maybe I started this thread because my friend in Toronto told me he paid $160 month with four kids, four servers that run 24/7, a wife, the laundry, the cold ... sorry dude, they're making a BIG profit in SoCal. I guess we're paying for Erin Brokivichs' victory.

[Savage1701]

Originally Posted by perf

On the positive side: If you live in a cold climate, the power consumed by your HTPC is not lost - it decreases your heating bill!!

(Especially if you have electric heating as many do in Scandinavia - then it is actually a wash.)

(On a side note - this is why using energy-saving light-bulbs is meaningless for many people in Scandinavia.)

/Per

Perf - I have noticed this effect in the winter. Unfortunately, we need to A/C in the summer and then having computer equipment on hurts your electric bill from both sides - paying for the computer gear energy use, paying for regular A/C, and paying for extra A/C to remove the heat generated by the computers.