• Home
• Reviews
• News
• Downloads
• CNET TV

About me

My posting summary

1 to 6 of 6

My comments

• "What does it hurt?"
  The issue is that all too often we look to some device (preferably with a screen) to solve complicated problems. The first iterations of these monitors will appeal to energy geeks (like me!) who will take the time to figure out what is wasting electricity and what to do about it. It will also appeal to folks who want the 'quick fix' and are willing to invest $100+ in the new 'screen' for the kitchen counter. What this 'hurts' is that a lot of money and potential action get misdirected into a solution that still requires, in the end, that people actually do something to control their energy usage. Someday (hopefully) the confluence of smart grids, smart appliances, and smart monitors will have a real impact. In the short term, however, it is a red herring that makes people think that they have done something by buying the device, and then they go to the big box and buy a bigger TV. Some clarification of those details in future articles would be useful, so that the general homeowner knows what they can do, RIGHT NOW, to affect their energy use. Because there are many things they can do: www.eere.energy.gov In reply to: "Millions of homes to get energy efficiency displays"

  December 11, 2009

  0 replies

• If the feedback isn't connected to specific devices, I will not know if the spike in electricity use is because my refrigerator kicked in, the AC switched on or my kid turned on the Wii and TV in the basement. After searching the house once or twice, I predict most people will just ignore these relatively dumb monitors... and several pilot projects have indicated that. And meantime a lot of money has been invested in something that isn't actually much smarter than the spinning meter on the outside of the house... it is just a little closer. Integrating these feedback loops into appliances and devices will require re-design and replacement with newer models... which can have other energy-saving features built in so that human 'monitoring' will become less important. Which leads us back to the real value of dumb home monitors. In reply to: "Millions of homes to get energy efficiency displays"

  December 10, 2009

  4 replies

• Phil is right about the poor performance of the smaller systems, especially the vertical axis ones. It isn't that they don't make electricity; it is that they don't make very much, very reliably. If you want to run a few lights and a radio in your remote cabin, it might make sense. If you want to run a typical household (or even an efficient one) you'll need a forest of them. Add to that the problems with some machines that fly apart sending pieces into the neighbor's yard, and well...
  Conservation and efficiency first. Don't be suckered by promises based on hopes and dreams... In reply to: "Small wind turbines blow out big sales"

  May 28, 2009

  0 replies

• Actually, we really need to do both. The PowerMeter idea is bridging technology, to encourage those that are willing to make behavioral changes that can help in the short term. Eventually, most appliances, electronics, HVAC equipment, etc. will be smart and connected and will automatically cycle to help balance demand on the grid and flatten out some of the peaks. This already happens in many communities with systems that allow utilities to cycle AC units during times of peak demand (hot, humid); most customers are completely unaware of the cycling. If most electric things used the minimum amount of electricity, and could time usage for when demand was lowest, SOME of the need for extra power production could be delayed, perhaps. Point is, EVERYTHING has got to be on the table... In reply to: "Google dribbles out PowerMeter smart-grid service"

  May 20, 2009

  0 replies

• "The center pin at a bowling alley isn't better positioned to do more damage at once than this reckless scheme which would string a power line over eagles, waterfalls, and history," the Sierra Club said in its April newsletter.
  Umm, I'm having a hard time with the images in this metaphor... anyone else? In reply to: "U.S. Chamber wants Congress to limit legal challenges to energy projects"

  April 17, 2009

  1 reply

• This is a very complicated subject and the article misses a few key distinctions: There are big differences in efficiency/payback depending on the part of the country/world the system is located in, the size and type of building being heated/cooled, and what other fuel types are being compared. Although (for example) it is true that these systems use less electricity to provide heat than other ELECTRIC heating systems, they may not use less electricity than a gas furnace... which is what most Americans use to heat their homes. And switching from a low carbon fuel (natural gas) to a higher carbon fuel (electricity generated by burning coal) is not an environmental advantage. In the colder parts of the country, these systems must be very large to generate enough heat, and then the cost goes up. If they are undersized, then supplemental heating systems are required. Like with most things, results vary greatly, and if you rely on marketing materials to make your decisions, well... In reply to: "Tapping the Earth for home heating and cooling"

  January 14, 2009

  0 replies