Dave Tweed wrote:

>I'm with Olin and Sean. By choosing open-wire lines for transmission, the
>power company has decided to accept a certain amount of energy loss to the
>environment. It's just economics -- shielding the lines would cost more
>than the value of the energy recovered.
>
>If my body and property are inundated with these fields, I see no valid
>argument that I shouldn't be able to make use of them. I use the same
>argument with regard to the microwaves that are coursing through my body
>from satellites (including pay-TV) and wireless communication towers.
>
>
The valid argument is that public utilities are given certian right of
way rights such that you may own the land over, under, around, or near a
public utility service, but the state and local governments have given
the utility rights to pass their structures over, under, around or
nearby your property and have given them legal protection from the
occupants of the land.

Whether you agree that these are good laws or not, you risk fines and
liability if you do not abide by them until they are changed.  You could
certianly disobey, but since there isn't a very strong movement in favor
of removing such right of way laws then I doubt you'll ever get back
your legal fees and fines in electrical 'savings'.

These sorts of arrangments are held 'for the common good', indicating
that if these activities weren't illegal then the HV lines would be
practically useless transmission meduims, which would be detrimental to
the general public in terms of availability, cost, etc.  You can't claim
that it's cost effective to build electrical transmission systems that
don't emit magnetic, rf & emf fields that are as cheap and as safe as
the current techniques.  Perhaps in the near future these issues will be
moot when we can generate our own power from more easily/safely/cheaply
moved resources.

Those who claim that it's free may as well also claim that once I get a
device (legally) with a PIC in it, I'm free to employee whatever methods
I choose to 'free' the code and do with that code as I please.  We are
all producers, whether you're talking about electricity, code, hard
goods, or music and movies.  While I believe that producers have too
many rights, and consumers too few right now, the scales do tend to
balance pretty well over the long run and I still believe that producers
should be afforded limited rights to their products, depending on the
product type.  We happen to be in a consumer unfriendly swing right now,
though...

>I do, however, accept restrictions on reselling that energy (or data) to
>others.
>
>
What, exactly, is the difference?  You profit from the energy in either
case - either personally or financially.  Is there really a
distinction?  I steal stuff from my neighbors yard, but I /never/ sell
it to the pawn shop - It would be wrong to convert their product into cash.

It's ok, however, to convert their product into light, heat, mechanical
energy, etc and profit from those resources.  You cannot convince me
that you believe your use of their magnetic field, wanted or not, does
not deprive them of part of their primary product.

-Adam

>-- Dave Tweed
>
>
>

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads