Cheap AA cells

[serberq]

Well done Justin & amstereo.

I cannot beleive the "pork chopism" of Phil Allison.

A straight up cloth-cock and clearly B.O.D. (better off dead !)

sigh.....

S.B.

On Sun, 19 Oct 2003 16:13:39 +1000, "amstereo - matt2"
<amstereo@optusnetDOTcomDOT.au> wrote:

"Phil Allison" <philallison@optusnet.com.au> while in public ashamed himself
with these replies in this thread and is now trying to save face - wotta
cocksucker no? news:3f90a78b$0$24674$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...

"Justin Thyme" <pleasedontspamme@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:3f905ed6@news.comindico.com.au...

"Phil Allison" <philallison@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:3f8fe86e$0$1089$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...

"Justin Thyme"


** WTF have rechargeables got to do with my point above
???????

You obviously missed the point

** Since there was not one.


You still don't understand it after I explained it to you? you must be
stupid.


** Get stuffed.



- hardly surprising - plugpacks aren't always
a suitable replacement for batteries because of the requirement to
have
mains power available. So, in a lot of circumstances, rechargeables
are
a better solution.



** Hey - fuckhead .

resorting to base language so quickly?

** You resorted to insult way back.


My point was about the massive energy inefficiency of alkalines.


Then why didn't you say that?


** Cos the **thread** was all about cost and energy capacity .........



you could have said "plugpacks are 1000 times
more energy efficient than batteries" or perhaps even "plugpacks are
1000
times more environmentally friendly than batteries", but instead you
said
they are 1000 times cheaper.


** Which they are BECAUSE of efficiency !!!!


Perhaps you need to brush up on your english
language skills,


** More insults ....


because 1000 times cheaper is simply a statement regarding
their price, it makes absolutely no statement about energy efficiency.


** See above - fuckhead.


You made a blanket statement about the cost of batteries vs plugpacks,


** I made a simple statement of fact - asshole.


to which I countered with an extreme example of where plugpacks are not
cost
effective to batteries.



** Did you imagine even one person alive was unaware a plug pack needs
AC
power ?????

Do you know what the word "specious " means ?????




You have nothing to say on that point - so shut up.


You didn't have anything to say on that point previously either. But now
suddenly you change tune and start talking energy efficiency instead of
cost.


** The two things are clearly linked - YOU missed that.


As you have so soundly proven your lack of cerebral ability, .....


** Go fuck your dog - moron.




............ Phil

 

[Phil Allison]

"serberq"



** Run out of porn sites tonight - ser dick ?






........... Phil

 

[Mark van der Eynden]

"Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<bmvste$rg2j4$1@ID-69072.news.uni-berlin.de>...

Mark van der Eynden <mvandere@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message news:48ed3358.0310191714.68dfdf43@posting.google.com...
Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote
Phil Allison" <philallison@optusnet.com.au> wrote

Using a plug pack adaptor is 1000 times cheaper than either.

And 2,000 times better for the environment.
AA batteries are alleged, in production, to cost
2,000 times the energy they produce over their life.

Why do people continue to repeat such obvious drivel?

Yours is the obvious drivel.

If it cost 2,000 times the energy they produce over their life
to make then the production cost would be AT LEAST 2,000
times the cost of the batteries they are intended to replace,

He's clearly talking about the energy cost to produce AA batterys, stupid.

which clearly they do not.

Duh.

Yes Rod, he is talking about the cost to produce AA batteries, so am
I, and I am not stupid, I just sometimes expect people to spend a few
moments thinking about what I post, rather than have me explain
something in detail over a couple of pages, which no one would read.

So think about it, along the lines of 'who pays for the energy
required to produce the article?', maybe the answer is 'You do when
you purchase the article'. Then you might conclude that if a battery
cost 2000 times the amount of energy it produced over its lifetime
then it would be so damn expensive no one would buy it.

Cheers,

Mark

 

[Phil Allison]

"Mark van der Eynden" >

Why do people continue to repeat such obvious drivel?

** Like the words below.

If it cost 2,000 times the energy they produce over their life to make
then the production cost would be AT LEAST 2,000 times the cost of the
batteries they are intended to replace, which clearly they do not.

** It is completely non sensical.





........... Phil

 

[Phil Allison]

"Mark van der Eynden" <

Yes Rod, he is talking about the cost to produce AA batteries,

** But not the cost in dollars - the cost in energy !


so am I, and I am not stupid,


** Wrong and wrong.


I just sometimes expect people to spend a few

moments thinking about what I post,

** Shame you failed to spend a moment yourself.

So think about it, along the lines of 'who pays for the energy
required to produce the article?', maybe the answer is 'You do when
you purchase the article'. Then you might conclude that if a battery
cost 2000 times the amount of energy it produced over its lifetime
then it would be so damn expensive no one would buy it.

** Still makes no sense.

What is the cost of basic energy ?

Electricity is the one we depend on most and that costs 13 cents
per kWh.

An alkaline battery supplies only 2.5 Whs - for about a
ollar - or $400 per kWh.






............... Phil

 

[Rod Speed]

Mark van der Eynden <mvandere@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message news:48ed3358.0310201433.4d05bc9d@posting.google.com...

Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
Mark van der Eynden <mvandere@iprimus.com.au> wrote
Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote
Phil Allison" <philallison@optusnet.com.au> wrote

Using a plug pack adaptor is 1000 times cheaper than either.

And 2,000 times better for the environment.
AA batteries are alleged, in production, to cost
2,000 times the energy they produce over their life.

Why do people continue to repeat such obvious drivel?

Yours is the obvious drivel.

If it cost 2,000 times the energy they produce over their life
to make then the production cost would be AT LEAST 2,000
times the cost of the batteries they are intended to replace,

He's clearly talking about the energy cost to produce AA batterys, stupid.

which clearly they do not.

Duh.

Yes Rod, he is talking about the cost
to produce AA batteries, so am I,

You're just drivelling, not 'talking' at all.

and I am not stupid,

Wrong. As always.

I just sometimes expect people to spend
a few moments thinking about what I post,

It stays drivel regardless.

rather than have me explain something in detail
over a couple of pages, which no one would read.

If you're incapable of actually saying what you mean in
a couple of sentances, clearly, you're obviously stupid.

So think about it,

Nothing to 'think' about, yours is just drivel.

along the lines of 'who pays for the
energy required to produce the article?',

Doesnt mean that its a significant part of the
cost of the production of an AA battery, stupid.

maybe the answer is 'You do when you purchase the article'.

Maybe it is. Maybe thats completely irrelevant to what matters.

Then you might conclude that if a battery cost 2000
times the amount of energy it produced over its lifetime
then it would be so damn expensive no one would buy it.

Or maybe you actually are so stupid that you cant
work out that thats complete drivel for yourself.

Lets take some very rough numbers, like say 150mA
for 10 hours from a battery like that. Thats about
1.5AH, say 3WH. Thats about 10KWH, say 50c

Even someone as stupid as you should be able to grasp that
thats not actually an outrageous cost for a battery like that, stupid.

 

[Mark van der Eynden]

"Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<bn2hcp$oc5sv$1@ID-69072.news.uni-berlin.de>...

Lets take some very rough numbers, like say 150mA
for 10 hours from a battery like that. Thats about
1.5AH, say 3WH. Thats about 10KWH, say 50c

Fantastic! You thought about it......... You can think!!!!!!

Now just one problem with the maths. You forgot to multiply by the
'life of the battery' (remember we are talking rechargables).

Say 500 charges, or roughly $250 to produce one cell.

See where the drivel is?

Have a nice one,

Mark

 

[Rod Speed]

Mark van der Eynden <mvandere@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message
news:48ed3358.0310211408.898de91@posting.google.com...

Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote

Lets take some very rough numbers, like say 150mA
for 10 hours from a battery like that. Thats about
1.5AH, say 3WH. Thats about 10KWH, say 50c

Fantastic! You thought about it......... You can think!!!!!!

Even you should be able to bullshit your way out of
your predicament better than that pathetic effort, child.

Now just one problem with the maths.

Nope.

You forgot to multiply by the 'life of the battery'
(remember we are talking rechargables).

Wrong. As always. What was clearly being discussed was AA Alkalines.
http://groups.google.com/groups?as_umsgid=3f8fbf2c%241@news.comindico.com.au&lr=&hl=en

Say 500 charges, or roughly $250 to produce one cell.

Wrong. As always.

See where the drivel is?

Yep, still what you keep spewing.

Have a nice one,

Have a shitty one, child.

 

[Mark van der Eynden]

"Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<bn4d13$stmf3$1@ID-69072.news.uni-berlin.de>...

You forgot to multiply by the 'life of the battery'
(remember we are talking rechargables).

Wrong. As always. What was clearly being discussed was AA Alkalines.
http://groups.google.com/groups?as_umsgid=3f8fbf2c%241@news.comindico.com.au&lr=&hl=en

Oh dear, from the context of the post, and previous posts I thought
the particular comments were about rechargeables.

OK. Rod, lets assume Alkalines.

Your figures give and 'energy' cost to produce of 50 cents. If you
will hark back to the initial post you will see Farnell is selling
them for 46 cents each.

So 50 Cents energy, 5 cents for metal, chemicals and labels, 10 cents
for Farnell and they sell them for 46 cents.

All up for a total loss of 19 cents each, and that's using
conservative figures.

I'm all out of nice days, have one of your favourites and remember to
redo kinder next time they offer you a place, bubs.

 

[Rod Speed]

Mark van der Eynden <mvandere@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message news:48ed3358.0310212121.39e8e8e5@posting.google.com...

Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote

You forgot to multiply by the 'life of the battery'
(remember we are talking rechargables).

Wrong. As always. What was clearly being discussed was AA Alkalines.
http://groups.google.com/groups?as_umsgid=3f8fbf2c%241@news.comindico.com.au&lr=&hl=en

Oh dear, from the context of the post, and previous posts
I thought the particular comments were about rechargeables.

The entire concept makes no sense at all with rechargables.
Those are still using mains power, albeit less efficiently.

OK. Rod, lets assume Alkalines.

Your drivel has been exposed for what it is.

Your figures give and 'energy' cost to produce of 50 cents.

Just a few general numbers. Doesnt have to be what the
manufacturer incurs, particularly in lower cost countrys.

If you will hark back to the initial post you will
see Farnell is selling them for 46 cents each.

So 50 Cents energy, 5 cents for metal, chemicals and
labels, 10 cents for Farnell and they sell them for 46 cents.

All up for a total loss of 19 cents each,
and that's using conservative figures.

Bullshit it is. Mine werent conservative numbers.

Reams of your puerile silly shit flushed where it belongs, child.

 

[eug k]

Wow.. ok I think i'll keep quiet and stick with rechargables for
my frequently-used devices and alkalines for the less frequently-
used ones. Rechargables aren't suitable for use in everything,
that would be my main criteria in deciding whether to use an
alkaline or nimh. Thanks for the feedback on the Digitors guys,
looks like i'll definitely be sticking to them!

Those vartas are definitely cheap.. if only I had friends who
used a lot of them.

anyone knows if I can get 9.6V nimh PP3s? People have mentioned
them on usenet before, but I can't seem to find a source.



Mike Harding <mike_harding1@nixspamhotmail.com> wrote:

We had a bit of a discussion about AA alkaline cell
costs on here a few weeks ago. Farnell are currently
offering a pack of 500 Varta AA alkalines for about
$230 inc. GST and del. which works out at 46c per
cell - which is _cheap_. Varta are a good make and
I guess would have a capacity similar to Duracell
et al.

So if you use _lots_ of AA cells or can split the box
with 3 or 4 mates these could be a goof buy.

Farnell cat #7779-9493

Mike Harding

 

[Tony Pearce]

"Trevor Wilson" <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> wrote in message
news:3f8f8b63$1@news.comindico.com.au...

"Mike Harding" <mike_harding1@nixspamhotmail.com> wrote in message
newsgquovggg5vdo2j5q0raclsegb7htfpeg9@4ax.com...
We had a bit of a discussion about AA alkaline cell
costs on here a few weeks ago. Farnell are currently
offering a pack of 500 Varta AA alkalines for about
$230 inc. GST and del. which works out at 46c per
cell - which is _cheap_. Varta are a good make and
I guess would have a capacity similar to Duracell
et al.

So if you use _lots_ of AA cells or can split the box
with 3 or 4 mates these could be a goof buy.

Goof buy is right They'd be flat before any normal person or 4 could use
them.

**Jaycar's are cheaper. And you only have to buy 24. Dunno if they're
better, though.

Or 4 for $2 at the Reject shop.

TonyP.