Hmm.. he was talking GBP, British Pounds.. i.e not much sun for solar=20
panels.... ;-)

Rolf

Jose Da Silva wrote:

>Electricity here is cheap by those standards. I figured it would take ab=
out 5=20
>years to pay-back the use of a solar panel here based on our rates, but=20
>based on the prices you suggest, you should be able to pay off a solar p=
anel=20
>much sooner.  If you mount it well/sturdy enough they should be able to =
last=20
>well over 10years (25 according to some articles, I think).
>
>On Monday 13 December 2004 01:26 pm, Philip Pemberton wrote:
> =20
>
>>In message <88eca922041213104171e713c8@mail.gmail.com>
>>
>>          Mike Hord <mike.hord@gmail.com> wrote:
>>   =20
>>
>>>On
>>>my system at home, behind a standard off-the-shelf Linksys router, it
>>>comes back as being nigh impervious to assault.
>>>     =20
>>>
>>Same here with my Linux box. Problem is, said Linux box has a problem
>>with.. well.. excessive power consumption. 200W! It's costing =A320 a
>>quarter (=A380) a year just to run that thing, not to mention the laser
>>printer (which isn't too bad; only 11W in sleep mode, which is what it
>>spends 90% of its time doing), the 17" CRT (65W), RiscPC (100W PSU
>>rating), and my P-III/600 workstation. All in, it comes to just over 60=
0W
>>and (in theory anyway) costs around =A363 a quarter, or =A3250 a year
>>worst-case [ note to self: find cheap 240V AC ammeter ].
>>
>>What I need is a nice, cheap, energy-efficient Linux system with an
>>onboard IDE/ATA controller. "Four options, you're free to pick any two".
>>
>>Later.
>>   =20
>>
>
> =20
>

_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist