Revolutionary Heatball

[stephendv]

https://www.heatball.de/en/index.php

95% efficient electric heater, only wastes 5% of the energy as visible light    

[martin]

I know someone who'll immediately rush out and buy loads of 'em!.....

[djh]

I'm sure it's possible to increase their efficiency by wiring several in series, so reducing the amount of pesky light that's emitted!

[Baz]

But wiring two in series uses more resources, so the inefficiency of the single item is probably worth putting up with.
I also think the short wavelength electro magnetic output is actually part of the design to provide direct radiant heating as the safety feature for blind people who can feel the radiant heat before accidently touching the heater.

[tz0c0s]

These things might even have a short future as lightbulbs 

[billi]

40000 ordered "heatballs" where seized by the German customs yesterday , arriving from China because there was the fear of hazardous goods   (someone does not seem to like the idea   )

They  cost 1.69 Euro each and 30 cent is   transferred for rainwood forrest protection


Billi

[Ivan]

I hope someone's not really trying to import/sell them. Please tell me you made that up, Billi.

[HalcyonRichard]

Hi,
    The guy selling them is against the ban on 100 watt light bulbs. He thinks there are better ways to save the planet. So he imports light bulbs and calls the heat balls to get round the EU legistlation.

viva la anarchy. freedom for tooting.

Regards Richard

[martin]

String 'em up! I am the fussiest, most pernicketty person going for light "quality", and am quite happy with my "energy savers everywhere" home (well, there is now one of the new generation LEDs too) - if you take your time finding bulbs that give the colour rendition you're happy with, they're great...... They also have the added bonus of a "slow fade up" start which allows your eyes to gently accustom themselves to the light when switched on!

[Ivan]

I figured that out. I wondered whether it was a spoof site, or whether he's really trying to import them.

I hope he's considered the rights of the people who suffer the effects of global warming and the species made extinct by climate change, as well as the people he believes should have the freedom to waste energy.

...he's shown how thick he is by claiming his heatballs are 95% efficient. What does he think happens to the light emission?

[billi]

http://translate.google.de/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=de&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=de&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.faz.net%2Fs%2FRubD16E1F55D21144C4AE3F9DDF52B6E1D9%2FDoc~E1A49BB514CEC4DD7ADBE5855DDC44710~ATpl~Ecommon~Scontent.html

[HalcyonRichard]

Hi,
    I think the guy is genuine. He is against legislation and for freedom. I suppose he would like people to be informed and choose the right way. I am against banning anything if there are better ways. Why not add enough tax to offset the lifetime cost of emmissions ?

The latest research shows "nudging people" gets far better results than telling them or banning things.

For instance there is a donor shortage. The government wanted a compulsory opt in. i.e if you did nothing consent was presumed. So you had to fill in the paperwork to opt out.

The easy way for one American state was to put two tick boxes on driving licence applications. One was for organ donation the other was to opt out. If you didn't tick a box you couldn't get a license.

Works a treat and you still have freedom of choice.


Regards Richard

[Ivan]

I diagree on freedom. Should we have the freedom to abuse children, to shout racist comments at foreigners, to commit crime, to scare people, to not pay our taxes (OK, I think I'm happy with the last one).

Freedom is only ok if it doesn't cause suffering. Freedom to be wasteful in energy causes suffering, although it's not in the immediate vicinity (time and distance) to the user. Just because we don't see it first hand doesn't mean it's acceptable. And just because someone is paying a financial penalty, doesn't mean it's acceptable (eg we wouldn't allow paedophilies who pay a financial penalty for their acts).

In this case, the guy is clearly not paying any tax. OK, 30cents contribution to rain forest for the sake of 100kWh of wasted energy. Of course, he's arguing the heating is useful. It might be for 6months of the year, the rest of the time, someone's turned on the aircon to get rid of that excess heat. And even for the winter, there are much lower carbon options for heating homes.

OK, it's only one lightbulb....but this is one container of 40 000 lightbulbs (=4 000 000kWh of wasted electricity)

[desperate]

Putting heat emitters up on the ceiling isnt an effective way of providing heat in any case. Underfloor heating is so effective because it put the heatsource in the best place, under ceiling heating is ok in some applications, but this seems more "screwball" than heatball

Desp

[HalcyonRichard]

Hi Ivan,
           I have never had a 100 watt light bulb. I have no incandescants in my house. I can't see banning them as logical if you don't ban all of them. What about 3 kW heaters - ban them and make everyone use gas. Cars use 12000kWh / year and 100,000 kWh to produce ban them everyone can use rail/bus/walk. Surely someone with a car is 1200 times more guilty than someone with a 100 watt bulb. I personally would never use a 100 watt bulb. Would it make more sense to make electricity more expensive the more you use ? Currently the unit price gets cheaper the more you use - madness.

I can see the day coming when everything will be banned OR compulsory.(I just hope I'm not here to see that day)

Regards Richard