Paul Burridge wrote:

On 12 Nov 2004 16:34:12 GMT, (Troglodite) wrote:



The way it was explained to me, the electric company sends you the stuff on one
wire, but it goes right back to them on the other wire. You should only be
paying a small rental fee, as you don't get to keep any of it, and they keep
re-selling the same electricity back to you and everyone else.

Doug Moore KB9TMY



Thanks, Doug. I'm glad *someone* here has some sense!
And another thing: many of us here in Britland use earthed neutrals,
so the power co. gets it's current back via earth alone. I don't mind
my own current being returned via my own garden, but why the hell
should everybody else's' current pass through my land en route back to
the power station? If the telephone company wanted to run a line over
my property, they'd have to pay me for the privilege (it's called a
"wayleave") but the power co. are paying me *nothing* for all the
other customers' earth returns running via my garden. What a rip off!



Paul; You could drive ground rods into opposite corners of your property
and extract some of the power from the earth and run your house for
nothing at all! In fact If you dig a deep enough trench in the middle,
you could isolate the ground and get a bigger return current!

--
Joe Leikhim K4SAT
"The RFI-EMI-GUY"

The Lost Deep Thoughts By: Jack Handey
Before a mad scientist goes mad, there's probably a time
when he's only partially mad. And this is the time when he's
going to throw his best parties.

On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 19:37:28 -0500, **THE-RFI-EMI-GUY**
wrote:

Paul; You could drive ground rods into opposite corners of your property
and extract some of the power from the earth and run your house for
nothing at all! In fact If you dig a deep enough trench in the middle,
you could isolate the ground and get a bigger return current!

Well, I don't see how that could work, but I had considered digging a
trench around my boundary and thereby cutting off the return path for
the other users' behind my house and demanding payment from the power
co. to re-instate it. But then it's obvious the return current's only
going to go deeper underground or around my property. It seems there's
nothing I can do to make any dough out of this. :-(
--

"What is now proved was once only imagin'd." - William Blake, 1793.

Paul Burridge wrote in message . ..
On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 19:37:28 -0500, **THE-RFI-EMI-GUY**
wrote:

Paul; You could drive ground rods into opposite corners of your property
and extract some of the power from the earth and run your house for
nothing at all! In fact If you dig a deep enough trench in the middle,
you could isolate the ground and get a bigger return current!

Well, I don't see how that could work, but I had considered digging a
trench around my boundary and thereby cutting off the return path for
the other users' behind my house and demanding payment from the power
co. to re-instate it. But then it's obvious the return current's only
going to go deeper underground or around my property. It seems there's
nothing I can do to make any dough out of this. :-(

Not sure, but somehwere it has to be stated that electric company MUST
provide an escape route for electrons they supllied to customers,
otherwise they will blow up your house in an eyeblink (assume you try
to steal their electrons). That's the only reason for the bill.

Paul Burridge schrieb:

The power company run a line to my house. They supply me with
electricity. This amounts to a 230V, 65A facility at the distribution
board in a cupboard under the stairs. I run all my stuff from that
board. The board contains several RCBOs that trip-out in the event of
any leakage current being sensed. If current in = current out; they're
happy and won't trip. Because they don't trip out, I conclude I don't
use any current.
The voltage supplied is 230VAC RMS. Since this is alternating between
equal positive and negative half-cycles, the average level of this
voltage supply is zero.
I use no current and they effectively supply no voltage. Why do I get
billed for electricity usage when I clearly can't have used any?

Because free energy is against one of the laws of thermodynamics - can't
remember which...
As everybody knows, you get fined for doing illegal things
That's what your power company is doing.

Regards
Markus

Paul Burridge wrote:
The power company run a line to my house.

Hey, maybe I can make the same argument to my water/sewage provider???

--
Luhan Monat: luhanis(at)yahoo(dot)com
http://members.cox.net/berniekm
"The Future is not what it used to be..."

On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 10:57:27 -0700, Luhan Monat wrote:

Paul Burridge wrote:
The power company run a line to my house.

Hey, maybe I can make the same argument to my water/sewage provider???

Certainly. If your "out pipe" is the same diameter as your "in pipe."
;-

--

"What is now proved was once only imagin'd." - William Blake, 1793.

In article ,
Paul Burridge wrote:

I use no current and they effectively supply no voltage. Why do I get
billed for electricity usage when I clearly can't have used any?

Because your a Dufus, and you deserve to PAY.......


Me

On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 13:42:19 +0000, Paul Burridge wrote:

The power company run a line to my house. They supply me with
electricity. This amounts to a 230V, 65A facility at the distribution
board in a cupboard under the stairs. I run all my stuff from that
board. The board contains several RCBOs that trip-out in the event of
any leakage current being sensed. If current in = current out; they're
happy and won't trip. Because they don't trip out, I conclude I don't
use any current.
The voltage supplied is 230VAC RMS. Since this is alternating between
equal positive and negative half-cycles, the average level of this
voltage supply is zero.
I use no current and they effectively supply no voltage. Why do I get
billed for electricity usage when I clearly can't have used any?

Please forgive my naivete, but this is a joke, right?

Thanks,
Rich

On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 23:18:28 GMT, Rich The Philosophizer
wrote:

Please forgive my naivete, but this is a joke, right?

It's a "thought-provoking metaphysical discussion." Care to
participate? ;-)
--

"What is now proved was once only imagin'd." - William Blake, 1793.

"Paul Burridge" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 23:18:28 GMT, Rich The Philosophizer
wrote:

Please forgive my naivete, but this is a joke, right?

It's a "thought-provoking metaphysical discussion."

No, it's not.