Can Someone Explain This Cat VS Non Cat Math To Me?

[Todd]

Saw this on the Woodstock site and don't get the math they come up with?

Note on EPA Efficiency Ratings

The EPA assigns a 72% efficiency rating to catalytic stoves, and a 63% efficiency rating to non-catalytic stoves. Although this is a difference of 9 percentage points, it is actually an increase in efficiency of 14% for catalytic stoves compared to non-cats. 72%/63% = 1.14, or a 14% difference.

 

[fossil]

9 is 14% of 63, so 72 is 114% of 63. Not sure why they're playing this game, other than to wow people with their formidable mathematical skills. Rick

 

[Highbeam]

We do this trick a lot at work. Yes, we're dorks. If I add 50 cents to your dollar I have increased your wallet size by 50 percent. If I take away the same 50 cents then I have only reduced your fortune by a third. If I kept doing this you should become rich, right?

It mostly comes up with asphalt thickness when the contractor wants to reduce the required thickness by a couple of inches and we can choose to state the reduction in a more negative way by using this math trick.

 

[Todd]

Ok, I get it, but I think I'll stick to the easy way 72-63=9. Makes more sense and doesn't give me a headache.

 

[BrotherBart]

3 guys go to hotel & share the last room for $30, each pays $10
later, deskclerk decides to give them a rebate of $5 . bellhop takes $5 to deliver rebate & decides to keep $2 as a tip. gives rebate of $1 to each of 3 guys.
each guy paid $10 at desk & got $1 back from bellhop= $9 x 3 guys=$27,+ bellhop kept $2 = $29?
where did the missing dollar go?

The hotel has $25, the bellhop has $2 and the guys have $3. There is no missing dollar "One Eyed One Who Swings Both Ways".

 

[BrotherBart]

why does the dollar seem to disappear?

Because the hotel was owned by Goldman Sachs. Misdirection in the farce subtracts the two bucks but never adds back the three dollars the guys got back.

 

[Dave_1]

why does the dollar seem to disappear?

Because the hotel was owned by Goldman Sachs. Misdirection in the farce subtracts the two bucks but never adds back the three dollars the guys got back.

This has nothing to due with the infamous G.S..

Its Bernanke's math, taught him by that great wizard, Greenspan, that encouraged the heloc bubble for sub_prime, Alt A, Interest only, & Jumbo loans for his banking pals.

An example of how their figuring works.

You have eleven toes, BB, assuming that you have been paying close attention when swinging yur axe. :bug:

Count from 10 back on one foot, then forward count the other foot.

When you stopped on one foot the digit count should have been 6, the other count should be 5.

How much is 6 + 5, BB?

Such is the same buffalo chips that Bernanke is slinging in his "Con_grossional Hearings."

Please note in the following link just how much$$$$ that is for each New Zealander.

Alan Grayson grills Ben Bernanke on Foreign Lending 07/21/2009

(broken link removed to http://eclipptv.com/viewVideo.php?video_id=6572)

 

[BrotherBart]

Nah. Henry Paulson was the desk clerk at the hotel.

 

[Wood Duck]

If the efficiencies from the EPA all are correct, and I put 100 BTUs worth of wood in each stove, I'll get 72 BTUs of heat from the CAT stove, and 63 BTUs of heat from the non-CAT stove. The difference between the two is 9 BTUs of heat output, and that is the real data here. The confusion comes in the data processsing/statistics part of the excercise. 9 BTUs is 9% of the total heat potential put into each stove, about 12.5% of the output of the CAT stove, and about 14% of the output of the non-CAT stove. So what is the difference in efficiency between the two? Statistics can be misleading (or are statisticians misleading?). In the end, it is still 9 BTUs difference.

 

[Todd]

If the efficiencies from the EPA all are correct, and I put 100 BTUs worth of wood in each stove, I'll get 72 BTUs of heat from the CAT stove, and 63 BTUs of heat from the non-CAT stove. The difference between the two is 9 BTUs of heat output, and that is the real data here. The confusion comes in the data processsing/statistics part of the excercise. 9 BTUs is 9% of the total heat potential put into each stove, about 12.5% of the output of the CAT stove, and about 14% of the output of the non-CAT stove. So what is the difference in efficiency between the two? Statistics can be misleading (or are statisticians misleading?). In the end, it is still 9 BTUs difference.

9 BTU's difference if your burning a toothpick in each stove. :lol: If you changed that to 100,000 btu's of wood that 9% looks a lot larger.