On Wednesday, November 30, 2011 2:30:59 PM UTC-7, HeyBub wrote:
George wrote:
On 11/28/2011 12:29 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
I thought that all electric heaters were 100% efficient.

What is this site talking about when they say:

"During the process of converting electrical energy into heat energy
a great deal of it is lost. Therefore an electrical heater is left
with 45% of the energy for heating purposes."

http://recomparison.com/comparisons/...diant-heaters/

P.S. I'm back to struggling with whether or not I should use a
constantly running oil-filled heater (set on low) in my small
workshop or should I run a small electric heater with a fan only
during those times when I'm in the shop, usually a couple of nights
a week and a few more hours on weekends.

I have both, so the initial cost is not a factor.

Typical marketing department nonsense.

This line "During the process of converting electrical energy into
heat energy a great deal of it is lost. " is total nonsense.

Where exactly is the energy lost except maybe a very, very tiny
fraction as heat in the wiring and connections? (and in this case not
a factor since the objective is to heat the room)

I've heard, that if you look closely, you'll find some very fine powder or
dust in the vicinity of some electric heaters. This is the loss in energy
inasmuch as the energy has been converted to matter. Of course it takes an
enormous amount of energy to create even the smallest amount of matter (and
vice-versa), so don't expect to see piles of the pills. But every electric
heater I've ever had will show dust around it after sitting in one place for
the winter season.

Perhaps that's what the "loss of energy" people are talking about.

And perhaps the electrical field produced attracted the dust?