Xref: utzoo sci.energy:3661 sci.electronics:16577 sci.physics:16127
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!apple!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!rpi!wrf
From: wrf@mab.ecse.rpi.edu (Wm Randolph Franklin)
Newsgroups: sci.energy,sci.electronics,sci.physics
Subject: Re: solar cells
Message-ID: <-BS^0H*@rpi.edu>
Date: 31 Dec 90 21:53:21 GMT
References: <939@venice.SEDD.TRW.COM> <1990Dec29.063939.20478@zoo.toronto.edu> <1990Dec31.173248.24523@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu>
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY
Lines: 25
Nntp-Posting-Host: mab.ecse.rpi.edu

In article <1990Dec31.173248.24523@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu> amirza@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (anmar mirza) writes:
>
>What is really good about passive solar heating and geothermal systems
>is that they *will* pay for themselves in savings compared to the old
>system. The turn around time can be as little as 10 years.

What interest rate does this assume?  Does it  take advantage of any tax
breaks (if there are any left)?  Thanks.

The reason I  ask is that  many "efficient" devices make  no sense in my
home when interest  is included.  E.g.,  I take years to burn  out  a $1
100W power 1700 lumen  1000 hour bulb.  Some haven't  burnt out since we
bought the house 8 years  ago.   A  $10 fluorescent bulb  would  have to
contain a nuclear  power source and  provide the   light free   to be as
cheap if money costs 12%.

Really, I'm in favor of conservation, but it has to honestly be cheaper.



-- 
						   Wm. Randolph Franklin
Internet: wrf@ecse.rpi.edu (or @cs.rpi.edu)    Bitnet: Wrfrankl@Rpitsmts
Telephone: (518) 276-6077;  Telex: 6716050 RPI TROU; Fax: (518) 276-6261
Paper: ECSE Dept., 6026 JEC, Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst, Troy NY, 12180