7 ms·

Sorry, a simple digital thermometer with a digital push button up/down temperature select is more than sufficient, and cheaper. Home automation, in general, ha

by ezy 15y ago

Sorry, a simple digital thermometer with a digital push button up/down temperature select is more than sufficient, and cheaper. Home automation, in general, has a similar feeling to all those weird devices you put in your microwave to make bacon. Buy a damn frying pan.

tomkarlo 15y ago
Sufficient, but clearly not optimal. Temperature regulation requires time-based cycles to minimize power use, a scenario that doesn't tend to be served very well by a manually-controlled system. For example, it generally makes sense to reduce heating use an hour or two after bedtime, until an shortly before folks wake up - is someone going to wake up to do that? There's a lot of room here for simple innovations that will save huge amounts of energy when spread out over thousands of homes. Think how much power is saved by motion sensitive lights at offices now.
- ezy 15y ago
  Ok, I can buy that my perspective is slightly different on these matters. I see people who set their AC to 67 and their heat to 78 -- even with time regulation this isn't going to save energy. IMO, Blankets and socks are a fairly universal solution, and that coupled with a few button presses saves an equal amount (maybe more[1]) of energy. I think the main selling point is going to be geek lust and how pretty it is, however. The energy savings is a loose justification for the consumer to spend money on it. [1] I wonder how much of the energy savings will be negated by people turning up the temperature in lieu of dealing with a little inconvenience and minor discomfort because they figure the t-stat will handle it.
  - tomkarlo 15y ago
    One place it could help is with the problem that most houses have - multiple people playing with the thermostat. It could help find the compromise point where everyone's happy enough that they stop fiddling.

7 ms·

Sorry, a simple digital thermometer with a digital push button up/down temperature select is more than sufficient, and cheaper. Home automation, in general, ha

by ezy 15y ago

tomkarlo 15y ago
Sufficient, but clearly not optimal. Temperature regulation requires time-based cycles to minimize power use, a scenario that doesn't tend to be served very well by a manually-controlled system. For example, it generally makes sense to reduce heating use an hour or two after bedtime, until an shortly before folks wake up - is someone going to wake up to do that? There's a lot of room here for simple innovations that will save huge amounts of energy when spread out over thousands of homes. Think how much power is saved by motion sensitive lights at offices now.
- ezy 15y ago
  Ok, I can buy that my perspective is slightly different on these matters. I see people who set their AC to 67 and their heat to 78 -- even with time regulation this isn't going to save energy. IMO, Blankets and socks are a fairly universal solution, and that coupled with a few button presses saves an equal amount (maybe more[1]) of energy. I think the main selling point is going to be geek lust and how pretty it is, however. The energy savings is a loose justification for the consumer to spend money on it. [1] I wonder how much of the energy savings will be negated by people turning up the temperature in lieu of dealing with a little inconvenience and minor discomfort because they figure the t-stat will handle it.
  - tomkarlo 15y ago
    One place it could help is with the problem that most houses have - multiple people playing with the thermostat. It could help find the compromise point where everyone's happy enough that they stop fiddling.