Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 23:17:27 -0700 From: Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC <chad@shire.net> To: "Ted Mittelstaedt" <tedm@toybox.placo.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Electricity bill - OT Message-ID: <45638E6B-7A62-11D9-B134-000D933E3CEC@shire.net> In-Reply-To: <LOBBIFDAGNMAMLGJJCKNOEEPFAAA.tedm@toybox.placo.com> References: <LOBBIFDAGNMAMLGJJCKNOEEPFAAA.tedm@toybox.placo.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Feb 8, 2005, at 11:02 PM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > The Bosch AquaStar line is rated at a maximum efficiency of .66 - .78 > energy factor, here is the link: > > http://www.controlledenergy.com/html/aquastar/design_features.html > > The tanked units on this page range from .62 to .65 energy factor > > http://www.aceee.org/consumerguide/topwater.htm > > This is not a particularly large difference. The .05 or so difference > of the tanked models is simply due to the fact that since they have > hot water tanks, those tanks lose heat, whereas a point-of-use > model has no heat loss except when it's in operation. > > But this has to be offset by the increased cost of manufacturing > several > of these devices instead of just 1 heater, the increased maintainence > costs because now you have many things that can break down instead of > just one, and you have to run gas piping all over the place, and you > have to put in an exhaust vent for each unit. You are obviously behind the times, Ted. Here is one that is tankless and only requires one per house (or one per tanked unit replaced). I just found this from googling and have no personal experience with it. It is electric. <http://www.gotankless.com/faq_1.html>; > Where the savings comes in is that they are typically used in locations > where there are very low infrequent usage of water. And in those > situations they save a huge amount of money. But in the typical 2 > parent, 2.5 child single family home the point-of-use models save > very little. > wrong. see above >> To compare this to 20 year old technology is >> foolish. >> > > Not every industry has technological advances at the rate of the > computer industry. Consider that you could take a 100-year-old > telephone set and plug it into the telephone network today, and it > would still work. We are not talking about phones. Chad
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?45638E6B-7A62-11D9-B134-000D933E3CEC>