kevin wrote:

Thanks for answering (partially) my question. This thread is
interesting -- it seems to be filled with more BS and hype than the
original link even was.


I agree with almost everything said in this thread.

I don't entirely understand your answer, though. I wasn't aware that
there was a "neutral on the utility's side of the meter". And if there
were, and I had a perfectly balanced load, then the neutral would have
no current, right? Which means... no losses, and hence no cost?
Obviously wrong... can you explain a little more?


There is a neutral from the power transformer to the service panel (then
beyond). A balanced load would result in zero service neutral current.
An unbalance would result in neutral current, a small voltge drop and
negligible power loss (small volt drop times current). If this were a
big deal, all wire sizes including to circuits inside your house would
be increased in size for lower voltage drop/lower losses.

And moreover, there was a lot of BS in this thread about balancing the
panel to begin with. To say that 240V devices are on both legs is
irrelevant to the question of whether balancing a panel makes economic
sense for the homeowner. Does a homeowner with a horribly imbalanced
panel get charged more than the same homeowner if they just rearranged
the breakers on the panel?

-Kevin


Far as I know meters accurately measure power used, balanced or not. The
gizmo is a scam. (And if a steel (EMT) service entrance pipe is used the
pipe shields the gizmo from the magnetic field.)

Another scam, as others have said, is power factor correction - unless
power factor is measured on residential meters, which I have never heard
of. Even if PF is measured on residential some of these units are scams.

bud--