Grahaml wrote:Perhaps it is just a way for this guy to make it more difficult, but the question remains, do you put the entire project in doubt for the sake of a few dollars, or are this guys claims untrue?
I doubt he has the technical knowledge or has paid for a technical report to be prepared on the set up and ongoing costs of his alternative. Its $6 per hour more expensive to run (on his numbers) but who knows how much it costs to set up instead of normal powered lights?
If it was only a few dollars either way I doubt an anti-lights councillor would even have suggested it (it would effectively become a yes vote for the project) and I doubt it would have been dismissed so quickly by the club.
I suspect everyone knows, including the councillor, that wind-powered energy is not a realistic scenario financially for 4 or 6 light towers on a suburban oval. You are giving him the benefit of the doubt .... I however think that the green-house gas emissions of the lights is not top of his of concerns about the project.
But I could be wrong. Do we have any engineers on this site?

In between signatures .....