On Tue, 8 Apr 2008 07:03:41 -0700 (PDT), ransley
wrote:

On Apr 7, 10:22*pm, Paul M. Eldridge
wrote:
On Mon, 7 Apr 2008 14:50:30 -0400, "Bill"
wrote:

Tankless is the way to go.
Just ask yourself, do you keep your auto running in the driveway so it will
be warm when you get in it?

They say tankless is 80% more efficient than an electric tank.
That one is more expensive, but it recoupes in cost in two to three years.

This is totally false. *According to the U.S. DOE, the standby losses
of a conventional electric water heater with an EF rating of 0.93 are
331 kWh a year. *At $0.10 per kWh, these losses amount to less than
$3.00 per month. *And if you live in an area where heating demands
dominate and the tank is located inside a conditioned space, your
actual out-of-pocket expense would be even less.

In addition, if you install a tankless water heater and it results in
excessive strain on the utility's distribution system or adversely
impacts power quality (e.g., flickering lights due to high transient
load), you could be held personally liable for the full cost of any
necessary transformer and line upgrades; a next door neighbour
complaining to the power company about "bad power" could very well
cost you several thousands of dollars.

http://www.progress-energy.com/custs...s/tankless.asp

Cheers,
Paul

Depending on your local rate it could be easily 80% more efficent,
mine was about 75% cheaper converting from electric tank to Ng
tankless. Then again some have cheap hydro and expensive fossile fuel,
and savings could be Zero. Each person has their own unique set of
costs, for some tankless is best, for some that would need large
tankless and major gas work tankless are not worth it.

Hi Mark,

We're really speaking of two separate things: efficiency and
cost-effectiveness based upon fuel choice and my comments pertain to
the former. The poster claimed a "tankless is 80% more efficient than
an electric tank" and this statement is categorically false.

As noted above, the standby losses of an electric water heater with an
EF of 0.93 or better are less than 1 kWh/day; at $0.10 per kWh, less
than $3.00 per month and during the winter months the net
out-of-pocket expense would be lower if the tank is located inside a
conditioned space (effectively nil if the home is electrically heated
and potentially net positive if heated with oil now that fuel oil in
many parts of North America is more expensive than electric
resistance).

Cheers,
Paul