Re: Working as intended
(apparently using gas to boil water in a far off electric plant, use that boiled water to generate electric, lose a load of electric down the wires and then use that to boil water in my washing machine is environmentally more friendly???? More profitable for the same sponsors of meps I think).
Ah yes.. That wonderful "green energy" stuff.. Electric cars are one of my bigger concerns here in NZ,as in, if enough people adopt them then our mothballed coal and gas plants would suddenly be getting all hot under the collar so-to-speak :) And of course there'd be the required upgrades to transmission lines, street transformers etc, probably a lot of places would have to switch in extra phases (see post above re single phase limits) - a lot of costs and construction required if electric cars were to become more common (I am all for reducing waste, increasing efficiency and protecting the environment, but I try to make sure that something sold as "green" doesn't need a couple of extra coal power stations and a few billion hectares of deforestation to support it - that stuff's shit brown, not green!)
Question though... Do you guys over there not have washing powders that work at least as well in cold water as they do in hot? I find that except for oil/grease from someone's engine, I don't have a need to do a hot wash. And if you do need the heat, can't you swap the in-feed to something from your water heater? Back in the old wringer-washer days we had a rubber hose we would push onto the tap we wanted to use. When mum finally got an automatic machine (actually sometime in the late 80's, when her 30+yr old machine finally packed up) she just used the same hose for the times she wanted a hot wash, saved money on changing all the fittings in the laundry by only changing the cold tap.
But yeah, a lot of "green" stuff looks great at a glance but when you sit down and do the math... I was a fan of wind farms till I went to use the numbers to prove to someone how great they are, and found out they aren't.
To those who wish to downvote based on my recent dislike of wind : Do the math yourself before downvoting, factor in backup generators, all costs of construction including transport of stuff to the site, developing/preparing the site (inc same for backup generators), replacement and disposal when the turbines fail at the end of their (often rather short) lifespan etc, and compare with modern nuke or hydro (very expensive build but very cheap for the next 100 years; we have stations in NZ that're in the 100yr region and several over 50yrs, that've maybe had turbine replacements and upgrades but no major work. One of the world's oldest hydro generators is still in use today on Mt Taranaki (in place since 1935 but built around 1901 and used elsewhere). Do some math, prove how great (or bad) wind is.
Sorry, should've got more sleep last night...