Posted by Lamumba on February 19, 2011, 11:41 am
It's just about the only source of all of our energy.
Passive Solar is very cost effective.
visit; The Solar Pathfinder
--
Karma, What a concept!
Posted by Rod Speed on February 19, 2011, 1:21 pm
Lamumba wrote
> It's just about the only source of all of our energy.
Wrong, as always. Pity about nukes.
> Passive Solar is very cost effective.
Wrong, as always.
> visit; The Solar Pathfinder
Go and fuck yourself.
Posted by Gordon on February 19, 2011, 7:01 pm
@mid.individual.net:
> Lamumba wrote
>
>> It's just about the only source of all of our energy.
>
> Wrong, as always. Pity about nukes.
Nukes and dry cell batteries. Everything else can be
traced back to solar.
>
>> Passive Solar is very cost effective.
>
> Wrong, as always.
Depends on how it's implemented. A conventional house,
properly oriented, with large south facing windows (or
north facing for those of you down under) can be very
cost effective. Since the house is being constructed
anyway, there is no additional cost to take advantage
of solar gain.
>
>> visit; The Solar Pathfinder
>
> Go and fuck yourself.
>
>
Posted by a real cheapskate on February 19, 2011, 8:04 pm
> @mid.individual.net:
> > Lamumba wrote
> >> It's just about the only source of all of our energy.
> > Wrong, as always. Pity about nukes.
> Nukes and dry cell batteries. Everything else can be
> traced back to solar.
> >> Passive Solar is very cost effective.
> > Wrong, as always.
> Depends on how it's implemented. A conventional house,
> properly oriented, with large south facing windows (or
> north facing for those of you down under) can be very
> cost effective. Since the house is being constructed
> anyway, there is no additional cost to take advantage
> of solar gain.
> >> visit; The Solar Pathfinder
> > Go and fuck yourself.- Hide quoted text -
> - Show quoted text -
they are known as passive homes, superinsulated heated by 1500 watts
in maine in winter.
theres a new tv show, this new house with amy matthews and a fellow
from this old house. appears to be a this old house offshoot.
a home that really needs little heat is very appealing, gas bills are
expensive
Posted by Rod Speed on February 19, 2011, 9:17 pm
a real cheapskate wrote
>>> Lamumba wrote
>>>> It's just about the only source of all of our energy.
>>> Wrong, as always. Pity about nukes.
>> Nukes and dry cell batteries. Everything else can be traced back to solar.
>>>> Passive Solar is very cost effective.
>>> Wrong, as always.
>> Depends on how it's implemented. A conventional house,
>> properly oriented, with large south facing windows (or
>> north facing for those of you down under) can be very
>> cost effective. Since the house is being constructed
>> anyway, there is no additional cost to take advantage
>> of solar gain.
>>>> visit; The Solar Pathfinder
>>> Go and fuck yourself.
> they are known as passive homes, superinsulated heated by 1500 watts in maine
in winter.
That has a substantial additional cost.
And I dont care to 'live' like that myself.
Yes, I could live very cheaply in used cool room, but its not my idea of a
viable house design.
I wouldnt even choose to 'live' like that just in the winter either.
> theres a new tv show, this new house with amy matthews and a
> fellow from this old house. appears to be a this old house offshoot.
> a home that really needs little heat is very appealing, gas bills are expensive
Still not prepared to 'live' like that myself.
XML site map