Johnny wrote:
> I want to secretly disable a window air conditioner. IE make it not
> be of much use. Ideally I'd like to make it not cool and blow cold
> air anymore. Or decrease it's effectiveness to cool air substantially.
Bad idea. Bad in concept and bad in execution.
> My house mate uses the AC in his room often, thus jacking our
> electricity bill up. To top it off, all of his money is blown away
> and he can never pay his portion of the electric bill until the day
> we are to be cut off.
You are describing your theory and evaluation of a fairness
inequity/discrepancy. Your assessment may not be correct.
> Aside from the obvious talking / discussing the issue, back to the
> main question. How could I covertly make this window AC unit less
> desirable to use and minimize it's effectiveness to cool? The ideal
> remedy would be one that could be hidden and not figured out what
> happened, i.e. snipping wires inside would be noticed upon
> inspection. I'm not sure how to drain coolant on window ACs.
You are not thinking properly, which also suggests that your earlier
assessment is more likely to be incorrect.
You aren't thinking properly as a fellow human being, you aren't
thinking properly as an AC technician, you aren't thinking properly as a
'criminal'/vandalizer, you aren't thinking properly as a lawyer.
If you were thinking better as a human being, you would seek a more
cooperative strategy. If you were thinking properly as an AC
technician, you wouldn't be trying to decrease AC efficiency to reduce
its power consumption. If you were thinking properly as a criminal
vandalizer you would realize the likelihood of your attempt at a covert
action to be discovered. If you were thinking properly as a lawyer, you
would realize the potential legal/ethical consequences of your act being
discovered.
One complicated resolution strategy which you and your roommate could
devise would be for you to think like a human being and a lawyer and an
accountant and establish an AC control cooperative.
You would determine in advance who is going to be 'in charge of' that
AC's thermostat or off/on status for all of the time periods for the
next month, say by the week. That is, week1 he is in charge, week2 you,
week3 he, week4 you, or some other division to make it completely fair.
At the conclusion of each week, the 'in charge' person has to pay an
amount equal to 1/4 of the previous month's electricity bill. This
accounting is to keep either of you from being behind on electricity
bill charges, and the AC control cooperative is so that he isn't in
total charge of it and so that you aren't in total charge.
There are other strategies which could be devised to solve some problems
with that strategy, such as the 'unfairness' of your being in charge of
the AC settings for a unit which is in someone else's room -- but the
recommended AC control cooperative would be more fair than his usurping
an unfair share of the electricity and your devising bizarre remedies.
Maybe your roommate sees your theory as to the inequities of his power
consumption compared to other inequities in the living arrangement in a
different light than you do. Maybe the whole scheme should be examined,
not just your theory of the AC power consumption.
--
Mike Easter
|