Well we in our area of eastern Canada tend to judge things and track them by the kilowatt hours used on our bills. Our billing period is every two months. Since the utility became private they increase the rates so often that dollar amounts would be misleading to mentally track total kilowatt hours used. .

There is even a six dollar surcharge to help customers increase efficiency and avoid the utilty having to increase generation capacity. For a change it is a great program so far.

They will come in and totally spray foam insulate a basement for example at no additional charge on request and make a direct contribution of decent proportions to anything that is more energy efficient like a new furnace or major appliance etc. change out you light bulbs, install a total off system for your television, on and on.

Naturally all this is paid for by the whole customer base. What makes it work so well is the vast majority do not bother to use it so far. So it concentrates available funds for those that do.. The program is audited and they are spending the money collected at least so far if not more.

It just occurred to me that I have a couple of air to air heat pumps on the way and should get them to pay the majority of the cost . The more efficient ones are in short supply. Mine apparently are in a container somewhere still.

Now back to Mr.Hunter. How many kilowatt hours are you using per billing period? What is the billing period? Do you have an old bill from a year or two ago or remember your consumption then?

Knowing these things can be a help in general. Especially how many people are living in your house. Sure these things are personal but not really intrusive of your privacy if posted is why I ask.

If anyone either has or is going to replace a water heater with an electric one buy a cheap normally insulated one and build an r60 insulated enclosure for it. Make the bottom at least r20 as well. The enclosure will cost you about the difference in cost between a normal water heater and a so called energy efficient model. Then you have the same efficiency as a tankless heater basically without the cost and possible headaches of them. Like almost everything the downside is the enclosure increases the size though. Some people have the space and others not.

Of course only safe to use on an electric water heaters. This nets the efficiency of a tankless water heater and payback with the massive reduction in standby costs is an additional quick repayment. Your enclosure makes their upgrade look like a sick puppy in comparison.

I am not the brightest light bulb myself and it just occurred to me that updating that flat screen television at Christmas may have had some eligibility in that program. Too late now if it did.

My attention to all things requiring energy was the serious ramping up of all energy costs and my suspicion locally this will continue. It is also just my opinion that there is so much money at stake leds will never change that much as their operation design is kind of locked in but there will be application improvements to come. Technically the multipal junction led is possible firing beams in all directions and may become the required evolution if not already out there. I cannot examine the whole market as I do not have the time.

The individual single junction leds having a fairly narrow beam of light output has caused me to design a better diffusion method than I have seen attempted. It has worked out to my satisfaction for under the counter lighting so far. Remember at times I can be extremely critical of what I want.

They are using about 7 watts per three foot fixture that is also dimmable. Since I cannot patent or register my approach it should remain no secret but involved quite an investment of mental effort and time to get it right.

Basically inadequate diffusion by semi opaque plastics was not satisfactory. You still saw evidence of the individual led beam effect. Or unequal light distribution if you wish. It would just not diffuse equally. Unless there were unreasonable losses.

Refraction of the beams first was inefficient if effective. What I did discover is there was little to no efficiency loss comparable if the opaque plastic was deeply ribbing on the surface. This was acting as a good much less loss refraction method. This diffused the light more equally and maintained a lower loss ratio..

Not rocket science again and so far see nothing on the market using this approach as well yet. I tend to also notice differences. Too many people are using home lighting with too low a kelvin temperature or the color of the light if you wish. Daylight color temperature bulbs or at least over 5000 degrees kelvin tend to make an area seem much brighter.

At first I thought this may be objectionable to some and may still be. For me it was a no brainer as you have more apparent light present at the same cost and I have grown to like it. Now I actually do not like warmer kelvin temperature lighting. I also think a lot of other people know and use this but just far from everyone.

I ramble on it this area because some things I do may be of common interest and in recent times there has been movement or changes in those areas. People need information to make more informed decisions. Efficient use of hydro has few down sides. As with most things watch out for the hype though.

Plus I want to see this thread active until the results of Mr. Hunters tests he is doing are in at least. Any distraction for him that can possibly take his mind away from his current suffering is good too.

I was just this morning thinking we should have named the latest dog lucky instead of chippo. That way the wife would always be asking me if I wanted to get lucky when he wanted in. Visitors would love the senario and it would boost my ego.