GWiz Posted February 7, 2011 Report Posted February 7, 2011 Thats what we do, genius. Quote There are none so blind, deaf and dumb as those that fail to recognize, understand, and promote TRUTH...- GWiz
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 7, 2011 Report Posted February 7, 2011 You're nuts... Manitoba does NOT buy power from the U.S.... Where'd you get that idea from? Manitoba SELLS electricity, as a major Hydro Electric Exporter (Quebec being the other major Hydro Electric Exporter) to the U.S. and other provinces at a negotiated export rate slightly higher than what Manitoba Hydro charges us (Manitobans)... Manitoba is part of the Midwest Independent Transmission System, and certainly does buy/sell electricity from the U.S. mostly along winter/summer peak demands. There is no reason for Manitoba to build more peak hours capacity if it can buy the existing excess from American states (and vice versa). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midwest_Independent_Transmission_System_Operator Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Shady Posted February 7, 2011 Report Posted February 7, 2011 Thats what we do, genius. Canada to ban incandescent light bulbs by 2012 Quote
GWiz Posted February 7, 2011 Report Posted February 7, 2011 Manitoba is part of the Midwest Independent Transmission System, and certainly does buy/sell electricity from the U.S. mostly along winter/summer peak demands. There is no reason for Manitoba to build more peak hours capacity if it can buy the existing excess from American states (and vice versa). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midwest_Independent_Transmission_System_Operator I link to Manitoba Hydro (the source) and you link to Wikipedia? Grid yes, but it's a one way flow, SOUTH... If under certain extreme conditions or event Manitoba is unable to supply the contracted amount of electricity to the states Manitoba "Buys Back" that shortfall in supply to the U.S.... Of course, being part of a "grid" means that if a part of that "grid" shuts down the electricity flow COULD be reversed to facilitate the functionality of the "grid" itself... Quote There are none so blind, deaf and dumb as those that fail to recognize, understand, and promote TRUTH...- GWiz
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 7, 2011 Report Posted February 7, 2011 I link to Manitoba Hydro (the source) and you link to Wikipedia? Grid yes, but it's a one way flow, SOUTH... If under certain extreme conditions or event Manitoba is unable to supply the contracted amount of electricity to the states Manitoba "Buys Back" that shortfall in supply to the U.S.... Of course, being part of a "grid" means that if a part of that "grid" shuts down the electricity flow COULD be reversed to facilitate the functionality of the "grid" itself... That's the long winded way of admitting that you were wrong. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
GWiz Posted February 7, 2011 Report Posted February 7, 2011 That's the long winded way of admitting that you were wrong. Nope, wasn't wrong, you were, not sending you electricity is hardly buying electricity now is it? Quote There are none so blind, deaf and dumb as those that fail to recognize, understand, and promote TRUTH...- GWiz
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 7, 2011 Report Posted February 7, 2011 Nope, wasn't wrong, you were, not sending you electricity is hardly buying electricity now is it? Electricity is a commodity...buying and selling happens on both sides of the border depending on generation, load, peak demand, seasonal needs, maintenance, transmission line ownership, etc. Manitoba (and other parts of Canada) mostly export excess capacity, but also import some electricity from U.S. operators. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Smallc Posted February 7, 2011 Report Posted February 7, 2011 You're nuts... Manitoba does NOT buy power from the U.S.... Yes it does. There was an article in the FP about a year ago. Quote
Wild Bill Posted February 7, 2011 Report Posted February 7, 2011 Oh yeah... A turbine like this one has about a 40 square foot footprint at ground level. At 1.5 megawatts he'll make $60+ dollars per hour when the wind is blowing enough to run the turbine at 66% of its peak output. In a windy area that could be 10 thousand dollars per month if youre get 6 or 8 cents per kwh. He would be lucky to make 100 bux a year farming wheat or corn on that 40 square foot patch! This could even help farmers get off WELFARE! Right now farmers recieve billions of dollars in federal welfare checks. About a quarter of their income on average comes not from farming wheat or corn, but from agricultural subsidies. My good doctor, apparently you are unaware of the sweetheart McGuinty deal with his MicoFit program! This takes your premise and sails it into the stratosphere, not as a disproof but as even more of a fact! McGuinty is paying people in Ontario 13.5 cents per KWH for wind generated power. If they put up a solar generating array they get 80 cents per KWH! What's more, they NEVER have to throttle back their output! The government has guaranteed to pay them for all their power, no matter what, for at least 20 years! I think McGuinty's people got a bit scared when the reality of the huge number of applications came in. They promptly changed the deal so that only rooftop solar got the full amount. Ground mounted systems got about 20 cents less, still a GREAT deal! However, that only served to enrage those farmers who had spent time and money on their business plan for a ground mounted array based on the full price, only to be denied even though they had applied long before the deadline but had just been caught in the backlog the government had generated itself! So we pay 80 cents per KWH even at times when other producers might have to shut down and we are paying other jurisdictions to take out surplus power! No doubt you can easily see even more things wrong with this picture! Quote "A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul." -- George Bernard Shaw "There is no point in being difficult when, with a little extra effort, you can be completely impossible."
GWiz Posted February 7, 2011 Report Posted February 7, 2011 Electricity is a commodity...buying and selling happens on both sides of the border depending on generation, load, peak demand, seasonal needs, maintenance, transmission line ownership, etc. Manitoba (and other parts of Canada) mostly export excess capacity, but also import some electricity from U.S. operators. Nope, Manitoba does not [b]import[/b] ANY Electricity... No need to... Manitoba currently generates approx. 10x the electricity Manitoba needs... It's 100% renewable Hydro Electric, for Canada and the U.S. midwest To increase it's capacity 2 New Hydro Dams are being built (primarily for U.S. consumption needs), currently underway and the subject of much dispute in Manitoba as to the transmission route... To match the U.S. Midwest's future needs the choice is buying clean Hydro from Manitoba or building more Nuclear or coal fired plants in places like North Dakota... Your choice... http://www.hydro.mb.ca/corporate/electricity_exports.shtml?WT.mc_id=2105 - Even when market prices are low, we may pursue opportunity sales because of high water conditions and our low costs associated with generating that additional electricity. The alternative would be to spill the water at our generating stations and forego making any revenue at all. Wholesale vs. Retail Electricity Pricing We export electricity into a wholesale market, where customers are largely other utilities. The electricity is delivered at a very high voltage and the utility is responsible for any additional costs associated with supplying that energy to their own retail customers. A comparison can be made with rates paid by large industrial customers here in Manitoba who, like our export customers, take delivery of electricity at a high voltage and then are responsible for any internal distribution costs. Wholesale electricity sold to U.S. customers at fixed rates is currently priced 50 per cent higher than what large industrial customers in Manitoba pay. For more information on our long relationship in electricity trading with U.S. markets, view the Manitoba Water Power website (open new window). - http://www.manitobawaterpower.com/future_developments/opportunities.html Quote There are none so blind, deaf and dumb as those that fail to recognize, understand, and promote TRUTH...- GWiz
GostHacked Posted February 7, 2011 Report Posted February 7, 2011 There is a chart on this information sheet ( http://www.cnpower.com/assets/news/cfl_info.pdf )explaining the mercury content of CFL bulbs compared to other household items. I don't use the bulbs because they don't last as long as advertised. In fact, I have regular bulbs that have lasted longer. The mercury content, however, is not as bad as you guys are making it seem: 1 watch battery = 5 CFL bulbs 1 dental amalgam = 100 CFL bulbs 1 home thermometer = 100-400 CFL bulbs 1 sump pump float switch = 400 CFL bulbs 1 tilt thermostat = 600 CFL bulbs 1 electrical tilt switch or relays = 600-700 CFL bulbs Not to mention the countless laptops, ipods, cellphones and cordless phones out there with more mercury in them than CFL bulbs, yet no one avoids using them for that reason. Having said that, you do need to be careful with them, clean up properly and recycle them even if they are broken (Home Depot and Walmarts have drop boxes). The difference with the mercury and other toxic chemicals in computers is that they are sealed in the computers equipment, the chips and such. if you break a computer there is little risk of you getting sick from the chemicals. When you break a bulb with mercury in it, you are directly releasing the mercury into the air or on your floor. One should not need a hazmat suit in order to change a lightbulb. Quote
GWiz Posted February 7, 2011 Report Posted February 7, 2011 The difference with the mercury and other toxic chemicals in computers is that they are sealed in the computers equipment, the chips and such. if you break a computer there is little risk of you getting sick from the chemicals. When you break a bulb with mercury in it, you are directly releasing the mercury into the air or on your floor. One should not need a hazmat suit in order to change a lightbulb. More bull crap... Better not go to work or school then because the odds are pretty high that you're working or studying under flourescent (FL, the C stands for compact) lighting... Are you getting your "hazard pay"? Quote There are none so blind, deaf and dumb as those that fail to recognize, understand, and promote TRUTH...- GWiz
GostHacked Posted February 7, 2011 Report Posted February 7, 2011 (edited) More bull crap... Better not go to work or school then because the odds are pretty high that you're working or studying under flourescent (FL, the C stands for compact) lighting... Are you getting your "hazard pay"? Why is mercury even used in florescent tubes? What's it's purpose? And if it's always been a concern, why are people only now starting to say something about it? Edited February 7, 2011 by GostHacked Quote
GWiz Posted February 7, 2011 Report Posted February 7, 2011 Why is mercury even used in florescent tubes? What's it's purpose? And if it's always been a concern, why are people only now starting to say something about it? Look it up... Try Google.. Then come back and tell the rest of us... My friend, if you're worried about your "personal" environment and the "chemical hazards" that surround you daily you wouldn't ever get out of bed... Quote There are none so blind, deaf and dumb as those that fail to recognize, understand, and promote TRUTH...- GWiz
GostHacked Posted February 7, 2011 Report Posted February 7, 2011 Look it up... Try Google.. Then come back and tell the rest of us... My friend, if you're worried about your "personal" environment and the "chemical hazards" that surround you daily you wouldn't ever get out of bed... Is there not another harmless element that can be used to light them instead of mercury? Quote
cybercoma Posted February 7, 2011 Report Posted February 7, 2011 Why is mercury even used in florescent tubes? What's it's purpose? And if it's always been a concern, why are people only now starting to say something about it? Regular flourescent bulbs have always had mercury in them. Over the last 10 years the amount of mercury has been reduced significantly due to electronic ballasts and other technological advances. The mercury that you are exposed to from a compact flourescent bulb is actually pretty similar to the amount of mercury you would consume by eating a couple cans of tuna each week. There is an acceptable amount of mercury that you can actually ingest before it's considered detrimental to your health. Unless you're licking the glass shards from your broken CFL, and even then, I'm pretty sure you have very little to worry about. On a side note, I mention the common household electronics because they often end up in landfills, where they are crushed and damaged by machines and/or vehicles in the course of normal landfill operations. While your concerns about the miniscule amounts of mercury in CFLs is unfounded, there is an unspoken reality about ever increasing amounts of mercury ending up in landfills and leaching into groundwater. The very fact that our national health agency had to change the recommended amount of fish people should be consuming shows that the increased amount of mercury in ladnfills is having a disastrous effect on our environment. It's not primarily due to CFL bulbs either. Quote
cybercoma Posted February 7, 2011 Report Posted February 7, 2011 Oh and when mercury vapour meets an electrical charge in the presence of phosphors it creates light. I took the liberty of hunting down a "How Stuff Works" article for you, so you can learn why there's mercury in these bulbs. And before you ask, "can't they use something other than mercury"? They can and they do, but the other chemicals are just as toxic, if not more so because they have to use more of them usually. Start here for the article: http://home.howstuffworks.com/fluorescent-lamp1.htm Quote
GWiz Posted February 7, 2011 Report Posted February 7, 2011 Is there not another harmless element that can be used to light them instead of mercury? You can look that up too... I'll help... LightEmittingDiodes; currently very expensive, lower "lumens"=less efficient, not readily available for home lighting applications... Having said that I would change to LEDs if the cost to benefit ratio were comparable to CFLs... I've already changed my flashlights to them... Quote There are none so blind, deaf and dumb as those that fail to recognize, understand, and promote TRUTH...- GWiz
GWiz Posted February 7, 2011 Report Posted February 7, 2011 (edited) Regular flourescent bulbs have always had mercury in them. Over the last 10 years the amount of mercury has been reduced significantly due to electronic ballasts and other technological advances. The mercury that you are exposed to from a compact flourescent bulb is actually pretty similar to the amount of mercury you would consume by eating a couple cans of tuna each week. There is an acceptable amount of mercury that you can actually ingest before it's considered detrimental to your health. Unless you're licking the glass shards from your broken CFL, and even then, I'm pretty sure you have very little to worry about. On a side note, I mention the common household electronics because they often end up in landfills, where they are crushed and damaged by machines and/or vehicles in the course of normal landfill operations. While your concerns about the miniscule amounts of mercury in CFLs is unfounded, there is an unspoken reality about ever increasing amounts of mercury ending up in landfills and leaching into groundwater. The very fact that our national health agency had to change the recommended amount of fish people should be consuming shows that the increased amount of mercury in ladnfills is having a disastrous effect on our environment. It's not primarily due to CFL bulbs either. I heartily agree... However the "murcury in landfills" issue has little to do with the "murcury in fish" issue (in Canada)... Seperate issues... Edited February 7, 2011 by GWiz Quote There are none so blind, deaf and dumb as those that fail to recognize, understand, and promote TRUTH...- GWiz
GostHacked Posted February 7, 2011 Report Posted February 7, 2011 Oh and when mercury vapour meets an electrical charge in the presence of phosphors it creates light. I took the liberty of hunting down a "How Stuff Works" article for you, so you can learn why there's mercury in these bulbs. And before you ask, "can't they use something other than mercury"? They can and they do, but the other chemicals are just as toxic, if not more so because they have to use more of them usually. Start here for the article: http://home.howstuffworks.com/fluorescent-lamp1.htm All the more reason to use the safer non toxic incandescent bulbs in my view. So we use less energy but use more toxic chemicals in the bulbs - Or - We use more energy with those emissions, but no toxic chemicals in bulbs? Not only that, the price of electricity has gone up so much in the past decade, you are not even going to save any money in the end if you switch to the CFLs. It all seems like a scam to me. Quote
GostHacked Posted February 7, 2011 Report Posted February 7, 2011 You can look that up too... I'll help... LightEmittingDiodes; currently very expensive, lower "lumens"=less efficient, not readily available for home lighting applications... Having said that I would change to LEDs if the cost to benefit ratio were comparable to CFLs... I've already changed my flashlights to them... Yeah that is an option for sure, and seems like the best one so far. I'll have to look into that. Good thing my electricity bill is included in my rent. Quote
Shady Posted February 7, 2011 Report Posted February 7, 2011 Not only that, the price of electricity has gone up so much in the past decade, you are not even going to save any money in the end if you switch to the CFLs. It all seems like a scam to me. Yep. It's a huge scam. All in the name of so-called environmentalism. But it sounds and feels good. So people go along with it. Quote
cybercoma Posted February 7, 2011 Report Posted February 7, 2011 (edited) I heartily agree... However the "murcury in landfills" issue has little to nothing to do with the "murcury in fish" issue... Seperate issues... Maybe so, but the mercury in landfills will end up in rivers and streams and in not only the fish we consume, but also the vegetation. Completely unrelated to the issue of CFLs poisoning people in their homes. The primary point I was trying to make is that the amount of mercury in CFLs is negligible. Having said that, they should still be recycled, since well over 90% of the material can be recovered, including the mercury. I would also like to think that most people don't break all that many lightbulbs. You've got to be awfully clumsy, especially with a CFL (it's way less likely for the metal base to become separated from the plastic compartment that contains the starter than it is for a metal base to snap off an incandescent bulb. Even then you're not shattering the glass containing the mercury), to break them. Edited February 7, 2011 by cybercoma Quote
GWiz Posted February 7, 2011 Report Posted February 7, 2011 Yeah that is an option for sure, and seems like the best one so far. I'll have to look into that. Good thing my electricity bill is included in my rent. Yup, but I'm sure somewhere down the road someone will tell us a "downside" to LEDs too... For some there will ALWAYS be a "downside" to just about anything... I'm quite happy to have totally converted my house to CFLs, and YES I can see a difference in my Hydro Bills... - see my post - http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=17916&view=findpost&p=623348 Quote There are none so blind, deaf and dumb as those that fail to recognize, understand, and promote TRUTH...- GWiz
GostHacked Posted February 7, 2011 Report Posted February 7, 2011 Yep. It's a huge scam. All in the name of so-called environmentalism. But it sounds and feels good. So people go along with it. When I sit down in my 'studio' just turning on my pc, monitors, speakers, keyboards, mixers, effects processors, uses quite a bit of juice. The money I'd save on CFL bulbs (if you ignore the initial higher cost) is negligible. Then again, I am the kind of person that turns stuff off when not in use. Or if I am not in a certain room, I don't keep the lights on. We have so much equipment that are 'vampires' in terms of sucking energy. Some electronic equipment still use power even when they are off. Like phone chargers, your new HDTV, your home theater system, Turn all that stuff off when not in use will same you money as well, more so than changing over to these new bulbs. Other stuff that is constantly on, home security systems. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.