[bookport] Re: Rechargeable Batteries

  • From: "John" <john@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2008 02:00:38 -0400

I agree that rechargeble batteries are more cost effective. I am not interested in having another charger that I have to keep track of. But it is a waste to throw away batteries. They are not even safe for the land fills.


John
http://WhiteCane.org
http://BlindWoodWorker.com
http://abrcaa.com
http://www.holyteaclub.com/whitecane.



----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Clark" <rclark0276@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, April 28, 2008 11:59 PM
Subject: [bookport] Re: Rechargeable Batteries


Rechargeable batteries are more cost effective in many cases. I am using NiMH. They may last half the time of alkalines, but they are re usable where alkalines are throw aways.

*---*  *---*  *---*  *---*  *---*
If at first you don't succeed, skydiving is not for you.
Robert & Dreamer Doll  ke7nwn
Newport, Oregon
N24C 8/2000 Hookup
rclark0276@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://webpages.charter.net/dog_guide/




--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.6/1402 - Release Date: 4/28/2008 1:29 PM




Other related posts: