[Marxism] privatizing the grid--a local perspective

Rod Holt rholt at planeteria.net
Mon Feb 6 23:57:37 MST 2012

Well, unlike yourself, I do have the patience to look it up again:
(Hans said) "if you use natural gas to heat water for a shower, you are wasting 95% of the exergy,
i.e., available energy.  You should use the gas to generate electricity and the waste heat from this electricity
generation for your shower." (Received here on Sunday, Feb. 3, 2012.)

You have handed us a host of errors, but I had hoped to present a counterexample to your thinking with your example of heating water for a shower. I did so with considerable detail (perhaps too much detail). You have not addressed that example and are now out of patience with me.

To end the discussion,

There once was a student named Ptolemy
Who proclaimed while flunking Ecology
		“the answer to the riddle 
		is the earth’s in the middle!”
And went on to develop Astrology

There once was a proud prof intellectual
who oft repeated as he lectured all
		exenergy’s the key
		as you will soon see
But his lessons were all ineffectual

And then an old man on the Marxlist
who would always loudly insist
		“Gibbs energy is free
		cannot otherwise be”
Until Proyect made him desist


On Feb 6, 2012, at 11:36 AM, ehrbar at greenhouse.economics.utah.edu wrote:

> ======================================================================
> Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
> ======================================================================
> Rod wrote:
>> I gave a simple illustration of a system for heating water
> Rod, I explained it to you in words ("it would be better to
> use the gas to generate electricty and use the waste heat
> from this generation for the shower" or similar, I don't
> have the patience to look it up again), I gave you my web
> site about exergy for dummies where the formula is derived in
> the simplest possible way for students who haven't taken a
> course in thermodynamics, I asked you to look up "second law
> efficiency" or "exergy efficiency" in wikipedia, and you are
> still repeating your old story about first law efficiency
> which is much less relevant than second law efficiency.
> Take a break, reread what I wrote, follow the links I gave
> you, and think about it a little more :)
> Hans
> ________________________________________________
> Send list submissions to: Marxism at greenhouse.economics.utah.edu
> Set your options at: http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/rholt%40planeteria.net

More information about the Marxism mailing list