[GBlist] No offence Intended

["Ted Shelton" <ted655@hotmail.com>]

          Ouch. You got me, both barrels. Good shot! If you still have ny 
post, could you read it again? Say in a day or two?  I truly was just asking 
a question. In our last life, we were fishing buddies. We both got drunk and 
fell from the boat. I'm surprised you don't remember. I did look at the 
chart.                                          Conversion

Efficiency
Energy Cost
Dollar Savings

per Year
Simple Payback in Years

(Without Interest)

Electrical
100%
8.66¢.kWh
103.49
2.09

Natural Gas
76%
$6.35/106 Btu
34.09
6.34

Oil
55%

     It's my ailment, not yours, but I;m having trouble understanding the 
relation between Conversion Eff. and the fact that resistive heat costs the 
most to create. Nukeular production costs us at both ends. High construction 
cost and high (impossible) disposal cost. Gas, oil, coal, if these forms of 
energy are less efficient at the hot water end, then you lose your 
efficiency when you use them to generate electricity at the front end. Isn't 
it the same log, you just cut your chunk off a different end than the rest 
of us?
      Now if I can use the term "practical", then I'm with you on that. For 
all the reasons I mentioned before, I think (in most cases), elec. tankless 
is the way to go. Actually I an having fun-- learning, questioning,observing 
etc..
     I'm sorry! I meant no insult to you, your expert ice or your research. 
Take care...Ted

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com


______________________________________________________________________
This greenbuilding dialogue is sponsored by REPP/CREST, creator of
Solstice http://www.crest.org, and BuildingGreen, Inc., publisher of
Environmental Building News and GreenSpec http://www.BuildingGreen.com
______________________________________________________________________