On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 04:34:49 -0500 Gene Heskett <gene.heskett@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > And its 4-10 watts consumed is pumped into the passing air to keep > itself cool. The air it moves may be cooler, but the heat in that > box is still 100% from i2R losses. I don't think anyone here is really arguing that the energy used to power the computer is converted to heat. I can't speak for others in the thread, but *my* point is that this is an inefficient way to heat a house, because you have to buy every watt of energy (as electricity) that goes into the house. >From the point of view of the person buying electricity, resistive heat is a terrible way to heat the house, as it doesn't take advantage of the fact that there's heat outside the house that can be tapped. Running your computers/TV/stereo all the time in the winter is CHEAPER in the winter, but it still isn't free - unless you actually DO use resistive heat to heat the house. Many people don't - especially in the milder climates where heat pump use is common. From the point of view of electricity use, heat pumps are more than 100% efficient. (No, this doesn't violoate the second law, it's just that the rest of the heat coming from the air in the yard or the ground doesn't show up on your electricity bill. :) ) To bring this back on topic, it'll probably still save you money to leave the computers off or in a power-saving mode during the winter. You just won't save as MUCH money as you would during the summer. -- -------------------------------------------------------------------- * Charles Taylor <tomalek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> * Chemistry instructor / Mad scientist / Linux enthusiast! -------------------------------------------------------------------- * Web: http://home.mindspring.com/~charletiv/ --------------------------------------------------------------------
