Comments on: New Bigger, Flashier Times Square Ball is Powered by LEDs

By: George

George — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 15:00:12 +0000

Energy efficiency doesn’t matter if it cost 30 or 40 times as much to build it. come on people. Think about it, ooooooooo 20 percent more efficient but it cost 30 times more to build it. screw that, thats where our economy is going. to dumb crap like this

By: George

George — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 15:00:00 +0000

By: George

George — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 15:00:00 +0000

By: Tom

Tom — Wed, 24 Dec 2008 05:02:05 +0000

So the ball is twice the size… does it weigh twice as much? If so, it’d be using twice the energy just to raise it… is that accounted for in the 10-20% efficiency?

By: Tom

Tom — Wed, 24 Dec 2008 05:02:00 +0000

So the ball is twice the size… does it weigh twice as much? If so, it’d be using twice the energy just to raise it… is that accounted for in the 10-20% efficiency?

By: Tom

Tom — Wed, 24 Dec 2008 05:02:00 +0000

So the ball is twice the size… does it weigh twice as much? If so, it’d be using twice the energy just to raise it… is that accounted for in the 10-20% efficiency?

By: Global Patriot

Global Patriot — Wed, 24 Dec 2008 04:47:59 +0000

This low level of energy usage is quite impressive, given the spectacular nature of the entertainment the ball will provide. Granted, it’s still an “optional” use of energy, but it is one of America’s great traditions and can serve to spread the word about new technology that is now available to save energy.

By: Global Patriot

Global Patriot — Wed, 24 Dec 2008 04:47:00 +0000

By: Global Patriot

Global Patriot — Wed, 24 Dec 2008 04:47:00 +0000