Siting of panels for solar water heating

On Sat, 25 Nov 2006 14:51:27 -0000 someone who may be "Mary Fisher" wrote this:-

Many people have better things to do with their lives than switch suppliers.
I haven't switched suppliers because I'm happy with my present ones. What's more, we're not on the breadline so we don't need to 'save' money.

The financial savings aren't great, especially if one considers the time and hassle of deciding on a new supplier and switching, perhaps every 12 months or so.
However, one reason some people find for changing electricity supplier is to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions, rather than their bills. Good Energy offer 100% renewable electricity. Ecotricity offer 100% renewable electricity sometimes (IIRC it was available, then not available, then available again) as well as their main product which is a rising proportion of renewable electricity. Obviously all these offers are under the same rules as the other electricity suppliers, an annual balance of electricity supplied to the system.
There isn't a "green" gas suppler. However, Ebico offer a socially responsible gas tariff that aims to transfer money from the well off to the less well off which some find worthwhile. They also offer electricity on the same basis.
-- David Hansen, Edinburgh I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

On 2006-11-26 08:11:43 +0000, David Hansen said:

On Sat, 25 Nov 2006 12:21:10 +0000 someone who may be Andy Hall andyh@hall.nospam> wrote this:-
Perhaps a year ago I saw three waste lorries heading down Leith Walk in Edinburgh, stopping in various places (sometimes at the same place). Two were from different companies and one from the council. It didn't strike me as a good way of utilising equipment or staff or road space, though no doubt it warmed the cockles of competition enthusiasts' hearts.
The simple solution would be for an arrangement that each company collects in different areas on different days.
That would take a ten year old an afternoon to work out.
You may think so.

I know so. I'll tell you how I know as well. When he was ten, my son did exactly this as part of a project.

However, bus companies that have arranged their timetables so that buses from two companies run alternately have found themselves hauled before those that supposedly guard competition and fined.

I have to admit that last time I went on a bus it was reminiscent of a corporation dust cart, but in other respects the two situations are not comparable.

On 2006-11-26 08:41:05 +0000, David Hansen said:

On Sat, 25 Nov 2006 23:41:11 +0000 someone who may be Andy Hall andyh@hall.nospam> wrote this:-
This doesn't look at the complete picture. The other effect of operating in this way is that the sorting is being done, in effect, by free labour from the perspective of those with the accountable cost - i.e. the local authority.
Having a recycling box in the corner of the kitchen, perhaps beside a residual waste bin and the wormery, is hardly difficult for someone.

That is neither here nor there, although I don't want to clutter the kitchen with assorted boxes for this type of plastic and that, different kinds of paper and so on. As to a wormery in the kitchen.....

The recycling box can be put out one week and the bin the other. Most people seem to manage this, it is interesting to ponder whether those who can't are unwilling or unable to do something so simple.

I think that the idea of collecting "residual waste" as you call it, only every two weeks is disgusting. Undoubtedly before very long the local authorities will be employing yet more people to investigate all of the implications of that in terms of vermin infestation, disease and all the rest of it. This is purely and simply a cost issue and the attempts to dress it up as anything else are laughable.
I don't want to spend the time on sorting through rubbish, as I've said. If the local authority would like this done then I want them either to do it or offer me a cost reduction to cover my time to do it.
Alternatively, the whole thing can be opened to competition and people can choose the service that they want.

Why do you submit to the tyranny of placing your waste in a bin? Surely the company employees should have to pick it up from where it is convenient for you to drop it?

I have no problem with putting all of the rubbish in a bin. One bin. Collected weekly. That has always been the available arrangement and I have not been given any justification to change those arrangements.

If they have to do it, then it adds to their cost, whether that is in labour or energy.
You may be prepared to pay for this, others would rather do the simple task of sorting (and some rinsing) themselves.

That's fine. It was the reason that I suggested that different levels of service should be available and that there should be competition and a free market in collection. As I already said, if the layers of unnecessary wasteful local authority involvement were taken out of the equation, even they could manage to offer a more cost effective service as one of the licensed operators.

On 2006-11-26 08:43:14 +0000, David Hansen said:

On Sat, 25 Nov 2006 15:35:31 +0000 someone who may be Andy Hall andyh@hall.nospam> wrote this:-
I didn't mention Uncle Joe - you did.
Of course. However, the idea of things being done for/to people centrally, rather than people doing things locally themselves, is generally called Stalinist.

Actually not. The key element of Stalinism is the authoritarian exercise of *state* power.
I didn't restrict the idea of the centralised sorting of rubbish to the local authority having to do it.

I really don't mind what they do. I expect to be able to put out all of the rubbish, each week, and for it all to be collected. I don't expect to do half the job of the refuse collector.
"I want. I want. I want."

I'm the customer. I pay. I should be able to choose.

On 2006-11-26 08:45:07 +0000, David Hansen said:

On Sat, 25 Nov 2006 15:41:17 +0000 someone who may be Andy Hall andyh@hall.nospam> wrote this:-
If local authorities wished to license themselves as one of the options, then that would be fine,
The private sector would claim that they couldn't possibly compete against the public sector, for a variety of reasons we are familiar with.

Fine. It doesn't really matter. Let them try though. I didn't suggest any restrictions.

On Sun, 26 Nov 2006 08:53:40 GMT someone who may be Alan Connor wrote this:-

And posting with a subject that announces to the world that they are discussing the siting of solar panels when they are in fact discussing disease-causing microbes doesn't strike tham as being odd at all.

Yawn. It is called thread drift.
What is mildly interesting is which of the various drifts in this thread that you have chosen to comment on.
-- David Hansen, Edinburgh I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

On Sun, 26 Nov 2006 09:33:48 +0000 someone who may be Andy Hall wrote this:-

That is neither here nor there, although I don't want to clutter the kitchen with assorted boxes for this type of plastic and that,

Why have different boxes for different types of plastic and whatever?

different kinds of paper and so on.

Ditto.

As to a wormery in the kitchen.....

What about one? A little one doesn't take up much space http://www.originalorganics.co.uk/wormeries.htm

I think that the idea of collecting "residual waste" as you call it, only every two weeks is disgusting.

Your thoughts are just that. If you wish to convince others then you need to come up with convincing arguments.

This is purely and simply a cost issue and the attempts to dress it up as anything else are laughable.

The background has already been explained in some detail.

-- David Hansen, Edinburgh I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

"David Hansen" wrote in message

Why do you submit to the tyranny of placing your waste in a bin? Surely the company employees should have to pick it up from where it is convenient for you to drop it?

That's called 1) a mother, 2) a wife.

If they have to do it, then it adds to their cost, whether that is in labour or energy.
You may be prepared to pay for this, others would rather do the simple task of sorting (and some rinsing) themselves.

I certainly would. It's hardly stretching even my little brain.
Anyway, recently the only exercise I've had is limping to the bins with rubbish.
Mary

"David Hansen" wrote in message

On Sun, 26 Nov 2006 09:33:48 +0000 someone who may be Andy Hall andyh@hall.nospam> wrote this:-
That is neither here nor there, although I don't want to clutter the kitchen with assorted boxes for this type of plastic and that,
Why have different boxes for different types of plastic and whatever?
different kinds of paper and so on.
Ditto.
As to a wormery in the kitchen.....
What about one? A little one doesn't take up much space http://www.originalorganics.co.uk/wormeries.htm
I think that the idea of collecting "residual waste" as you call it, only every two weeks is disgusting.
Your thoughts are just that. If you wish to convince others then you need to come up with convincing arguments.
This is purely and simply a cost issue

Oh - above you suggested that it was a tidiness issue ...
"I don't want to clutter the kitchen with assorted boxes for this type of plastic and that, ... "
Are there any more issues?
Mary

"David Hansen" wrote in message

On Sat, 25 Nov 2006 15:35:31 +0000 someone who may be Andy Hall andyh@hall.nospam> wrote this:-
I didn't mention Uncle Joe - you did.
Of course. However, the idea of things being done for/to people centrally, rather than people doing things locally themselves, is generally called Stalinist.
I really don't mind what they do. I expect to be able to put out all of the rubbish, each week, and for it all to be collected. I don't expect to do half the job of the refuse collector.
"I want. I want. I want."

NOW NOW NOW!
Which day would suit you best, guv?
Mary

"John Beardmore" wrote in message

It really isn't rocket science to work out that if one takes non productive cost element from a product or service, it can be delivered to the customer for less money, or the customer can get more for the same money. Indeed, though we differ in that you believe that the LA layer contributes nothing, and having seen it up close, I'm not sure I agree. I've seen enough to be able to see that if many of the people were doing equivalent jobs in the private sector, they would be out of the door. Standards are very disappointing among LA employees from my observations. Yes - there are some sad fossils, but we're going round in circles here. I haven't changed my position. Nor have I.
So by definition, we can't be going round in circles...
We can certainly loop over stating the same views ad nauseam.
So.... why not make it so. For the local authority elections, it would be a simple matter to put different implementation alternatives on the ballot papers as well as the candidates. Yes - but as LAs deal with so many issues waste would be lost in the noise. You really need voting on a per issue basis, including consent to pay - otherwise people will vote for micro budget with macro deliverables.
U.S. local and state government manages it OK. There are a set of propositions. Each is campaigned for as appropriate and the electorate votes. No vote. no money spent.

Ah! That's why all Americans are so happy with their various levels of government!
Um. Their turnout for elections is even lower than ours.

Mary

"David Hansen" wrote in message

On Sat, 25 Nov 2006 14:51:27 -0000 someone who may be "Mary Fisher" mary.fisher@zetnet.co.uk> wrote this:-
Many people have better things to do with their lives than switch suppliers.
I haven't switched suppliers because I'm happy with my present ones. What's more, we're not on the breadline so we don't need to 'save' money.
The financial savings aren't great, especially if one considers the time and hassle of deciding on a new supplier and switching, perhaps every 12 months or so.
However, one reason some people find for changing electricity supplier is to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions, rather than their bills. Good Energy offer 100% renewable electricity. Ecotricity offer 100% renewable electricity sometimes (IIRC it was available, then not available, then available again) as well as their main product which is a rising proportion of renewable electricity. Obviously all these offers are under the same rules as the other electricity suppliers, an annual balance of electricity supplied to the system.

I've switched (using the existing supplier) to green generation. Don't know how it works but I've stated my preference.

Mary

On Sun, 26 Nov 2006 10:10:08 -0000 someone who may be "Mary Fisher" wrote this:-

Oh - above you suggested that it was a tidiness issue ...
"I don't want to clutter the kitchen with assorted boxes for this type of plastic and that, ... "
Are there any more issues?

I'm not even sure what the "cost issue" is. On the one hand we are told that councils are 'reducing the number of collections' and thus reducing costs. On the other hand we are told that councils are employing 'armies of officials' and thus increasing costs.
-- David Hansen, Edinburgh I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

On Sun, 26 Nov 2006 10:07:48 -0000 someone who may be "Mary Fisher" wrote this:-

You may be prepared to pay for this, others would rather do the simple task of sorting (and some rinsing) themselves.
I certainly would. It's hardly stretching even my little brain.

Indeed. With a single bin for residual waste, a single bin for recyclables (with the sorting being done at the kerbside) and a single bin for composting, I'm sure it is within the grasp of just about everyone.
-- David Hansen, Edinburgh I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

On 2006-11-26 09:51:17 +0000, David Hansen said:

On Sun, 26 Nov 2006 09:33:48 +0000 someone who may be Andy Hall andyh@hall.nospam> wrote this:-
That is neither here nor there, although I don't want to clutter the kitchen with assorted boxes for this type of plastic and that,
Why have different boxes for different types of plastic and whatever?
different kinds of paper and so on.
Ditto.

You tell me.
Here's the list from my local authority of what they would like to be put and not put in recycling containers::

* Plastic milk, squash, soft drinks, water and vegetable oil bottles without their plastic bottle tops * Plastic washing up liquid, fabric softner, shampoo and bleach bottles * Steel and aluminium drinks and food cans * Plastic bottles with the number 1 or 2 on the bottom
* Newspaper and magazines * Cardboard packaging, but not polystyrene * Cereal packets without the plastic lining * Telephone directories and yellow pages * Paper catalogues, envelopes and junk mail without any plastic lining * Soap powder and frozen food boxes
* Plastic bags or carriers * Margarine and ice cream tubs * Cling film and plastic bottle tops and lids * Plastic wrappers * Plastic toys * Yogurt and cream pots * Aluminium foil * Engine oil ro antifreeze containers * Large amounts of cardboard (over 1 metre in length) * Glass bottles and jars * Expanded polystyrene * Tetrapak drinks cartons * Large bundles of newspapers or catalogues
The first two lists are supposed to be included, the third not.
There are a small number of items on the exclusion list which are obvious to exclude such as engine oil containers and glass.
However, when it comes to plastics, I really don't want to deal with checking the list for every item being thrown away. Is it detergent or a milk carton or a yogurt pot? Does it have 1 or 2 on the bottom? Why not the top? This is nonsense.
What constitutes a *large* bundle of newspapers? etc. etc. etc.

As to a wormery in the kitchen.....
What about one? A little one doesn't take up much space http://www.originalorganics.co.uk/wormeries.htm

I suppose the things are quaint if you like that kind of thing.
However, I don't think that a large plastic dustbin is the kind of thing that I would want in the kitchen.

I think that the idea of collecting "residual waste" as you call it, only every two weeks is disgusting.
Your thoughts are just that.

Ah. Now at this point you would be saying "Excellent. Personal abuse"

If you wish to convince others then you need to come up with convincing arguments.

I don't need to convince anybody other than those who can deregulate the whole charade.
Alternatively, I can continue to chuck everything into the (one) bin.

This is purely and simply a cost issue and the attempts to dress it up as anything else are laughable.
The background has already been explained in some detail.

Really? More greenwash.