Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 33 guests
| Water Heater Question | |
|---|---|
by thinkstoomuch
» Tue Apr 05, 2016 6:11 am
|
|
|
thinkstoomuch
Posts: 2727
|
I wanted to break it out separately as I didn't understand it.
In the Solar power topic Daryl said that he is for banning electric water heaters. What is the rationale for this? Been trying to figure this out for a few days. Thank you for something my scatter brain can work on. But I have reached spinning in circles with no useful understanding. Thanks in Advance, T2M -----------------------
Q: “How can something be worth more than it costs? Isn’t everything ‘worth’ what it costs?” A: “No. That’s just the price. ... Christopher Anvil from Top Line in "War Games" |
| Top | |
| Re: Water Heater Question | |
|---|---|
|
by Weird Harold
» Tue Apr 05, 2016 6:40 am
|
|
|
Weird Harold
Posts: 4478
|
Heating anything with electricity is the least efficient use of electricity. Converting all electric heating appliances to inductive heating would help some, but resistance heating is just horrible wasteful of energy. .
. . Answers! I got lots of answers! (Now if I could just find the right questions.) |
| Top | |
| Re: Water Heater Question | |
|---|---|
|
by Spacekiwi
» Tue Apr 05, 2016 6:57 am
|
|
|
Spacekiwi
Posts: 2634
|
Quick google shows papers as far back as 2008 and before on inductive hot water cylinders, so there are people working on this,theres just problems getting it as usable as current cylinders im guessing
`
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ its not paranoia if its justified...  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ |
| Top | |
| Re: Water Heater Question | |
|---|---|
|
by Daryl
» Tue Apr 05, 2016 7:07 am
|
|
|
Daryl
Posts: 3503
|
Electric water heaters are similar to electric fan heaters, cheapest to buy but dearest to run. If you do care about the carbon cycle they release more carbon per litre of hot water than any other.
To heat hot water there are numerous better options. I think the efficiencies as listed below are in order. 1- Solar heat exchange panels (my home), with a booster - gas or electric but rarely used. 2- Wood heater using free deadfall wood. (still costs to collect) 3- Heat exchange or pump. Same principle as an air conditioner or refrigerator but in reverse. Instead of producing the heat you pump it, either from the air or from another source like pipes buried in the ground. Ratio about 3.5 to 1 in electricity usage. 4- Gas instant. Water is heated as you need it. A cousin's in the Scottish Highlands sounds like a jet in the middle of winter. An investment house I have has this. Very popular in the UK. 5- Gas storage. Heat water in an insulated tank. 6- Electricity instant. Was popular in the UK, but seems to be being replaced by instant central heating gas systems now. 7- Electricity storage. Least efficient. (confession time I replaced one of these with the same in another investment house as it was cheapest & I'm not paying for the power). As an aside some towns and properties in the Australian outback are supplied water by deep artesian bores which is boiling hot from geothermal heat. There they have a large storage tank for the cooler (never cold there) water, and the hot water comes straight from the supply.
|
| Top | |
| Re: Water Heater Question | |
|---|---|
|
by Weird Harold
» Tue Apr 05, 2016 7:19 am
|
|
|
Weird Harold
Posts: 4478
|
Getting it cheap enough to replace the installed base of conventional water heaters is more likely. It isn't rocket science. I'm not sure which is more efficient; on demand induction electric or on demand gas/propane. Any on demand system is better than a hot water tank. .
. . Answers! I got lots of answers! (Now if I could just find the right questions.) |
| Top | |
| Re: Water Heater Question | |
|---|---|
|
by aairfccha
» Tue Apr 05, 2016 2:22 pm
|
|
|
aairfccha
Posts: 206
|
What magic of physics makes induction heating more efficient than a resistance heating element (cooktops excepted)? |
| Top | |
| Re: Water Heater Question | |
|---|---|
|
by Weird Harold
» Tue Apr 05, 2016 3:07 pm
|
|
|
Weird Harold
Posts: 4478
|
The same physics that make inductive cooktops efficient makes any inductive heating element more efficient. The only difference is that the heated element isn't moveable like inductive compatible pots and pans. .
. . Answers! I got lots of answers! (Now if I could just find the right questions.) |
| Top | |
| Re: Water Heater Question | |
|---|---|
|
by aairfccha
» Tue Apr 05, 2016 4:09 pm
|
|
|
aairfccha
Posts: 206
|
So an electric kettle or boiler with the heating element immersed in water (most extreme case, optimal heat transfer into water) is somehow less efficient than some form of induction heating where the power electronics needed generate unused waste heat elsewhere? The exception for cooktops is due to the heat being generated in the pot itself and due to pot/pan size not matching the heated area, neither does apply in this form when the heating element is built in. EDIT: Oh, and a hot water tank allows using low- or intermittent power sources for hot water generation, heating water as needed means you have to have power on demand. |
| Top | |
| Re: Water Heater Question | |
|---|---|
|
by Daryl
» Wed Apr 06, 2016 7:28 am
|
|
|
Daryl
Posts: 3503
|
Totally agree aairfccha.
Heating water with an electric element is efficient in itself, and more so than using induction to heat the element. Where electric water heating by element becomes inefficient is in the production and distribution of that electricity. Why burn gas to boil water to power a turbine to produce electricity to send over vast distances on a network, when the same gas could just boil the water directly. Solar and dead fall timber heaters essentially use free stuff, while heat pumps use the electricity more efficiently to move the heat rather than produce it. |
| Top | |
| Re: Water Heater Question | |
|---|---|
|
by thinkstoomuch
» Wed Apr 06, 2016 8:08 am
|
|
|
thinkstoomuch
Posts: 2727
|
Why have a electric plant a vast distance away? Nearest to me is in Riviera Beach, less than 10 miles away. Even burns natural gas using combined cycle and less than 5 years since construction began. Rated at 1,250 Megawatt another in west Palm Beach county again less than 50 miles away. Fed by pipeline. How much energy is required to deliver liquefied propane to a house? Well first some vast distance away there is a well (also true for natural gas) ... Somewhere along the way it is liquefied a VERY energy intensive step. Then is is loaded onto a local delivery truck weighing thousands of pounds to haul a low energy by volume product to your house. You are looking at the last step for each. Which is not the entire energy cost. Natural gas in Western New York has some advantages as natural gas infrastructure is already in place. Though to be honest I have no real clue as to the losses actually involved with each. A search of the internet didn't seem to yield much whole cycle energy costs. Just the dang last step for each.  This topic did go off in some directions I didn't think of. Thank you all. Have fun, T2M Edit I had friend who in North Carolina had a standby generator fed by propane and his house (hurricanes again). He was not amused by the cost to run that generator Compared to electricity delivery cost. Also was not amused by the cost to heat that house with LPG compared with electricity. But he did have power and heat when Floyd and others came through. -----------------------
Q: “How can something be worth more than it costs? Isn’t everything ‘worth’ what it costs?” A: “No. That’s just the price. ... Christopher Anvil from Top Line in "War Games" |
| Top | |