I need to replace my 50 Gal. gas water heater.
I've been living alone in a house and never run out of hot water. I
always take showers, never baths, and my overall hot water use is
exceptionally low.

I'm wondering about two things.
Would a 40 Gal. tank meet my needs and would I realize a noticeable
savings by going with a smaller tank?

BTW, I rent the tank.

Thanks!

On Aug 23, 6:17*pm, RepairNovice wrote:
I need to replace my 50 Gal. gas water heater.
I've been living alone in a house and never run out of hot water. I
always take showers, never baths, and my overall hot water use is
exceptionally low.

I'm wondering about two things.
Would a 40 Gal. tank meet my needs and would I realize a noticeable
savings by going with a smaller tank?

BTW, I rent the tank.

Thanks!

You mean by a 40 gallon gas heater? Or a 40 gallon electric heater?
If comparing electric versus gas do a cost comparison of the two
fuels, for your area.
.
As long as it provides sufficient hot water each time you use it is
doubtful that you would save very much, if anything noticeabl;e by
installing a smaller tank.
the amount of heat lost from a well insulated tank/heater being very
small. Note:

Also the heat 'lost' from the heater helps, in winter anyway, to warm
the house!

Note. The difference in surface area of a 40 gallon compared to a 50
gallon tank will be approx. of the order of 22% (very roughly). So the
slight difference in loss of heat from the hot water inside a well
insulated tank to the ambient air temperature of whatever room in
which it is installed will be very slight!

My electric company says that my hot water costs, typically, less
than 20% of my total electricity bill. In my case as a single person
less than that. So even if that could be reduced by one quarter the
reduction in cost each month would hardly be significant. maybe 30
cents per day; at best?

My 0.02

"terry" wrote

My electric company says that my hot water costs, typically, less
than 20% of my total electricity bill. In my case as a single person
less than that. So even if that could be reduced by one quarter the
reduction in cost each month would hardly be significant. maybe 30
cents per day; at best?

Look another way. 30cents a day adds up to 30x30=9$ a month. It may not be
much, but it's a decent lunch a month when eating out, or 2 at many a fast
food place.

On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 13:40:41 -0700 (PDT), terry
wrote:

You mean by a 40 gallon gas heater? Or a 40 gallon electric heater?
If comparing electric versus gas do a cost comparison of the two
fuels, for your area.

Yes I mean replacing my 50 gal. gas heater with a 40 gal. gas
heater.

Wouldn't it cost more money to heat more water on an on-going basis?
Just wondering.

On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 16:53:56 -0400, "cshenk" wrote:

Look another way. 30cents a day adds up to 30x30=9$ a month. It may not be
much, but it's a decent lunch a month when eating out, or 2 at many a fast
food place.

That's right. If I could save $9 a month and not notice any hot
water shortage, I'd go for it.

On Aug 23, 4:59�pm, RepairNovice wrote:
On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 16:53:56 -0400, "cshenk" wrote:

Look another way. �30cents a day adds up to 30x30=9$ a month. �It may not be
much, but it's a decent lunch a month when eating out, or 2 at many a fast
food place.

� That's right. If I could save $9 a month and not notice any hot
water shortage, I'd go for it.

i doubt the savings will be that much, ands check the first hour
rating of the old and perspective new water heater. not all are the
same

On Aug 23, 3:17*pm, RepairNovice wrote:
I need to replace my 50 Gal. gas water heater.
I've been living alone in a house and never run out of hot water. I
always take showers, never baths, and my overall hot water use is
exceptionally low.

I'm wondering about two things.
Would a 40 Gal. tank meet my needs and would I realize a noticeable
savings by going with a smaller tank?

BTW, I rent the tank.

Thanks!

Why rent, buy it its cheaper in the long run, you will save with a
smaller tank. You will also save because the new tank wont have scale
at the bottom. To save more shop and compare by EF energy factor, alot
of cheap ones are still 50 EF

RepairNovice wrote:

I need to replace my 50 Gal. gas water heater.
I've been living alone in a house and never run out of hot water. I
always take showers, never baths, and my overall hot water use is
exceptionally low.

I'm wondering about two things.
Would a 40 Gal. tank meet my needs and would I realize a noticeable
savings by going with a smaller tank?

BTW, I rent the tank.

Thanks!

Check out the following:

http://www.nipsco.com/energyprograms...rInfoSheet.pdf

It's a rather indirect but valid way of guesstimating the annual savings
a 1 person household would see in replacing an old water heater with a
40 gal vs a 50 gal.

So, assuming that the 40 and 50 gal heaters are equally efficient and
adequate to your needs, you should save approx 20 therms per year with
the 40 gal. Where I live, gas is running between $1.25 and $1.50 per
therm, so that would be a $25 to $30 savings per year.

RepairNovice wrote:
I need to replace my 50 Gal. gas water heater.
I've been living alone in a house and never run out of hot water. I
always take showers, never baths, and my overall hot water use is
exceptionally low.

I'm wondering about two things.
Would a 40 Gal. tank meet my needs and would I realize a noticeable
savings by going with a smaller tank?

BTW, I rent the tank.


You RENT the water heater?

How does that work?

terry wrote:

... The difference in surface area of a 40 gallon compared to a 50
gallon tank will be approx. of the order of 22% (very roughly)

More exactly, (50/40)^(2/3) = 1.16, ie 50 would have 16% more surface.

Nick

On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 14:02:54 -0700 (PDT), ransley
wrote:


Why rent, buy it its cheaper in the long run, you will save with a
smaller tank. You will also save because the new tank wont have scale
at the bottom. To save more shop and compare by EF energy factor, alot
of cheap ones are still 50 EF

Well had I known I would be still be in the same house ten years ago,
I would have bought a tank then.

If I buy a new tank now and move in a couple of years I think I would
lose out on the deal. A move is a distinct possibility for me in the
next few years.

On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 21:21:46 GMT, Erma1ina
wrote:



Thanks Erma for this info!



Check out the following:

http://www.nipsco.com/energyprograms...rInfoSheet.pdf


So, assuming that the 40 and 50 gal heaters are equally efficient and
adequate to your needs, you should save approx 20 therms per year with
the 40 gal. Where I live, gas is running between $1.25 and $1.50 per
therm, so that would be a $25 to $30 savings per year.

On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 17:50:22 -0500, "HeyBub"
wrote:

BTW, I rent the tank.


You RENT the water heater?

How does that work?


Yes my title does a have a poor choice of words, but I didn't say I
rent the water heater, (see above)

On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 18:56:24 -0400, Claude Hopper
wrote:


Thanks Claude for your input.

My 50 gal. tank also started leaking a few weeks ago.
It was about 10 years old and as I mentioned I've been renting.

They replaced it with another 50 gal. tank but I'm not happy with it.
For some reason (I haven't figured it out yet) the replacement tank
can be heard all throughout the house when the water is heating up.

I could never hear the original tank unless I was in the furnace room.

So when I ask the company to come back I thought I'd look into getting
a 40 gal. tank instead, for cost savings.

Are point of use tankless water heaters costly? Can they be installed
in any house?

Thanks!



I replaced a 40 gallon tank that started leaking with a 20 gallon and
had all the hot water I needed for showers and dish washing. I too live
by my self.

Then I moved and had hot water off the boiler coil. That thing ran 10 or
15 times a day even if I didn't use any hot water. So I shut that off
and installed 2 point of use tankless water heaters and don't regret it
a bit. They only run when you actually use them. One for the bathroom
sink and shower and another for the kitchen sink. I love this. The
longer you use it the hotter it gets.

"RepairNovice" wrote in message

Yes I mean replacing my 50 gal. gas heater with a 40 gal. gas
heater.

Wouldn't it cost more money to heat more water on an on-going basis?
Just wondering.

Minimal difference.

FWIW, we had a 40 gallon for our family of four in our old house and we
never ran out of hot water. Showers, laundry, dishwasher, it kept up with
our needs.

The savings to be had are the difference it takes in gas to keep 50 gallon
versus 40 gallons at temperature. This is a direct ratio of the heat loss
of the two tanks as the larger tank has more surface area. In either case,
if you use 10 gallons of hot water it will be replaced by 10 gallons of cold
water and on either sized tank it will cost the same to bring it up to
temperature.

If you heat your house in the winter there will be no savings. The heat
lost from the water through the tank and into the air is just the same as
the heat from your furnace or boiler that would have to run longer, so, your
savings may take place only half the year or so.

I'd replace it with the easiest solution. If the connections of the 50
gallon tank line up, it is an easy swap. If, however, you'd have to re-plumb
for the smaller tank, you'd probably wipe out a year or two in savings.

"Erma1ina" wrote in message

Check out the following:

http://www.nipsco.com/energyprograms...rInfoSheet.pdf

It's a rather indirect but valid way of guesstimating the annual savings
a 1 person household would see in replacing an old water heater with a
40 gal vs a 50 gal.

So, assuming that the 40 and 50 gal heaters are equally efficient and
adequate to your needs, you should save approx 20 therms per year with
the 40 gal. Where I live, gas is running between $1.25 and $1.50 per
therm, so that would be a $25 to $30 savings per year.

Well that depends. Where is the lost heat going? If it is going into the
house and assisting the home heater there is really no savings at all during
heating season so it may be half what is stated.

On Aug 23, 1:59*pm, RepairNovice wrote:
On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 16:53:56 -0400, "cshenk" wrote:

Look another way. *30cents a day adds up to 30x30=9$ a month. *It may not be
much, but it's a decent lunch a month when eating out, or 2 at many a fast
food place.

* That's right. If I could save $9 a month and not notice any hot
water shortage, I'd go for it.

most folks used 20 galon heaters decades back no problem. even with
a family

if you are in a cheap electric area. pacific northwest, an instaneous
water heater will save you a lot

I can get by with a 5 gal heater in my motor home ,, 40 is gross
overkill imo

Phil scott

On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 21:24:38 -0400, "Edwin Pawlowski"
wrote:


FWIW, we had a 40 gallon for our family of four in our old house and we
never ran out of hot water. Showers, laundry, dishwasher, it kept up with
our needs.

Thanks Ed, this is good to know.


In either case,
if you use 10 gallons of hot water it will be replaced by 10 gallons of cold
water and on either sized tank it will cost the same to bring it up to
temperature.

I was just thinking that a 50 gallon tank that needs to be kept at a
certain hot temperature would require more gas than a 40 gallon tank.

I don't know how the tanks work, but I was assuming that the tank's
complete contents are kept at a fixed temperature.

"RepairNovice" wrote in message

I was just thinking that a 50 gallon tank that needs to be kept at a
certain hot temperature would require more gas than a 40 gallon tank.

I don't know how the tanks work, but I was assuming that the tank's
complete contents are kept at a fixed temperature.


Yes, they are. The greater the mass the more heat to be stored and the more
heat given off during the down times. What you need to know is how often
and how long the burner runs just to maintain the heat level. As I said, if
that "lost" heat from the tank is helping to heat your house, there is no
additional cost during heating season.

If you do downsize, under your circumstances even a 30 gallon would be OK.
That is really a lot of hot water for showers or even a batch of laundry,
especially since most can be done in cold water these days.

On Aug 24, 2:22*am, RepairNovice wrote:
On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 21:24:38 -0400, "Edwin Pawlowski"
wrote:

FWIW, we had a 40 gallon for our family of four in our old house and we
never ran out of hot water. *Showers, laundry, dishwasher, it kept up with
our needs.

*Thanks Ed, this is good to know.

In either case,
if you use 10 gallons of hot water it will be replaced by 10 gallons of cold
water and on either sized tank it will cost the same to bring it up to
temperature.

*I was just thinking that a 50 gallon tank that needs to be kept at a
certain hot temperature would require more gas than a 40 gallon tank.

I don't know how the tanks work, but I was assuming that the tank's
complete contents are kept at a fixed temperature.

As pointed out the cost of the slightly less heat leaking from the
surface area of a 40 gallon tank as compared to that leaking from the
surface pf a 50 gallon tank would be minimal.

Also that heat, if you heat your house during say the winter or longer
(depending where you live) merely means that your furnace or other
heating devices would operate slightly longer to make up for the heat
'not' coming from the hot water tank.

Personally thinking the the difference will be so slight that the most
economical plan is just to slap in another heater with exactly the
same dimensions and plumbing hook-ups.

Also as pointed out the cost of hot water is not, usually, one of the
major ongoing household costs. Unless you consider that cost of gas
will increase drastically?

Intensive discussion about the difference in cost of the amount of
heat leaking (into the house itself) from keeping the difference of 10
gallons of hot water at a certain temperature seem rather pointless.
Presumably the water heater/tank is insulated???

What we do is leave warm shower water and the occasional hot bath to
cool down warming the air etc. in the bath room before drainuing it
away. Of course because of moisture we run the bathroom fan while
doing that which 'wastes' some warmed air to outside.

If you are really agonising about the overall cost of hot water and
your hot water use is low; look at the cost of electricity versus gas
in your area and the costs of installing a cheaper and smaller
electric hot water heater. There will also be plumbing costs if you
can't do it yourself. And then get rid of the gas connection, chimney
or flue vent completely.

This discussion is getting far too complicated.

On Aug 23, 11:11*pm, Claude Hopper
wrote:
RepairNovice wrote:
On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 18:56:24 -0400, Claude Hopper
wrote:

Thanks Claude for your input.

My 50 gal. tank also started leaking a few weeks ago.
It was about 10 years old and as I mentioned I've been renting.

They replaced it with another 50 gal. tank but I'm not happy with it.
For some reason (I haven't figured it out yet) the replacement tank
can be heard all throughout the house when the water is heating up.

I could never hear the original tank unless I was in the furnace room.

So when I ask the company to come back I thought I'd look into getting
a 40 gal. tank instead, for cost savings.

Are point of use tankless water heaters costly? Can they be installed
in any house?

Thanks!

I paid $144.00 each for my tankless heaters and installed them myself.
They are 25 amps so you need to run 30 amp line to each unit plus plumbing.



I replaced a 40 gallon tank that started leaking with a 20 gallon and
had all the hot water I needed for showers and dish washing. I too live
by my self.

Then I moved and had hot water off the boiler coil. That thing ran 10 or
15 times a day even if I didn't use any hot water. So I shut that off
and installed 2 point of use tankless water heaters and don't regret it
a bit. They only run when you actually use them. One for the bathroom
sink and shower and another for the kitchen sink. I love this. The
longer you use it the hotter it gets.

--
Claude Hopper *? 3 * * *7/8- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

It's nice to hear that you are well satisfied with tankless hot water
heaters.

There is another do it your self group that frequently has questions
and complaints about them but it also criticises and decries our North
American practice of having a hot water storage tank either heated,
electrically, by gas or from a heating furnace.

230 x 25 amps = 5750 watts. And they only use electricity while water
is being used.

As pointed out you required 30 amp wiring; and 30 amp double pole
circuit breakers to connect them. That's only 10 AWG IIRC. Not hard
to do usually; but occasionally requires 'bunching up' things
electrically in the main circut breaker panel?

On Aug 24, 2:01*am, terry wrote:
On Aug 23, 11:11*pm, Claude Hopper
wrote:





RepairNovice wrote:
On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 18:56:24 -0400, Claude Hopper
wrote:

Thanks Claude for your input.

My 50 gal. tank also started leaking a few weeks ago.
It was about 10 years old and as I mentioned I've been renting.

They replaced it with another 50 gal. tank but I'm not happy with it.
For some reason (I haven't figured it out yet) the replacement tank
can be heard all throughout the house when the water is heating up.

I could never hear the original tank unless I was in the furnace room..

So when I ask the company to come back I thought I'd look into getting
a 40 gal. tank instead, for cost savings.

Are point of use tankless water heaters costly? Can they be installed
in any house?

Thanks!

I paid $144.00 each for my tankless heaters and installed them myself.
They are 25 amps so you need to run 30 amp line to each unit plus plumbing.

I replaced a 40 gallon tank that started leaking with a 20 gallon and
had all the hot water I needed for showers and dish washing. I too live
by my self.

Then I moved and had hot water off the boiler coil. That thing ran 10 or
15 times a day even if I didn't use any hot water. So I shut that off
and installed 2 point of use tankless water heaters and don't regret it
a bit. They only run when you actually use them. One for the bathroom
sink and shower and another for the kitchen sink. I love this. The
longer you use it the hotter it gets.

--
Claude Hopper *? 3 * * *7/8- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

It's nice to hear that you are well satisfied with tankless hot water
heaters.

There is another do it your self group that frequently has questions
and complaints about them but it also criticises and decries our North
American practice of having a hot water storage tank either heated,
electrically, by gas or from a heating furnace.

230 x 25 amps = 5750 watts. And they only use electricity while water
is being used.


And that is going to supply hot water in sufficient quantity to do
exactly what? He's got one tank type now that supplies his entire
house. With typical incoming water temps in winter in most parts of
the US, 5750watts isn't going to supply enough hot water for even a
decent shower.

Which is why you rarely, if ever, see an electric tankless used as a
whole house solution. If you have gas available, then it's another
story.

Another questionable notion is the idea that the heat loss from a
water heater is less important because it goes to help heat the house
in winter. I think in general, this is simply false. First, much
of the heat loss in a gas heater is up the flue. Second, the heat
that escapes the insulated surfaces of the tank, would go entirely
toward helping heat the house, IF the tank were in the living space.
Don't know about you, but I rarely see water heaters sitting in the
kitchen. Usually, they are in the basement or garage. Let's say
it's in an unfinished basement area, close to an outside wall as they
are usually installed. I'd venture that the amount of the escaping
heat that makes any impact on the energy usage of the house is tiny
compared with the heat that is lost in the basement to the surrounding
walls, etc.

And even if the tank was in the living space, somehow the fact that
this heat is working against you when you have AC running never gets
mentioned.

In short, to the OP, from your water usage situation, I see nothing
wrong with going with a 40 gal unit. That is a very popular size for
homes without the need for large amounts of hot water. Many homes
have them and are not running out of hot water. Besides the initial
cost being less, whatever you save on your energy, every little bit
helps.





As pointed out you required 30 amp wiring; and 30 amp double pole
circuit breakers to connect them. That's only 10 AWG IIRC. *Not hard
to do usually; but occasionally requires 'bunching up' things
electrically in the main circut breaker panel?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

cshenk wrote:
"phil scott" wrote
"cshenk" wrote:

I can get by with a 5 gal heater in my motor home ,, 40 is gross
overkill imo

Probably. I just checked and we have a 40G gas unit. House of 3. We do
have to time our showers/tub baths a bit but it is not hard. The dishwasher
has to be accomodated for as well. Nominally need about 20 mins between
bath/shower/dishwasher uses.

40G is plenty for one person. Ok for 3 with a little timing.

Something definitely out of whack if a 40 g doesn't cut it for only
three. Raised four kids and wouldn't be able to think of time it was an
issue...

--

"phil scott" wrote
"cshenk" wrote:

I can get by with a 5 gal heater in my motor home ,, 40 is gross
overkill imo

Probably. I just checked and we have a 40G gas unit. House of 3. We do
have to time our showers/tub baths a bit but it is not hard. The dishwasher
has to be accomodated for as well. Nominally need about 20 mins between
bath/shower/dishwasher uses.

40G is plenty for one person. Ok for 3 with a little timing.

"RepairNovice" wrote

Thanks Claude for your input.

My 50 gal. tank also started leaking a few weeks ago.
It was about 10 years old and as I mentioned I've been renting.

Ah, having rented before to others, this may be an agent issue vice owner?
Do you have contact with the owner?

Although I would have been happy to get emails from my renters if there was
an issue, they never availed themselves of that option. I am unsure if the
40G tank was sufficient for their needs for example. There were 2 adults
and 3 kids here. It's one thing to adjust a 20 min heat cycle with just 3
people and totally another with 5.

They replaced it with another 50 gal. tank but I'm not happy with it.
For some reason (I haven't figured it out yet) the replacement tank
can be heard all throughout the house when the water is heating up.

Odd. Something wrong and I bet the house owner wants to know this.

I could never hear the original tank unless I was in the furnace room.

So when I ask the company to come back I thought I'd look into getting
a 40 gal. tank instead, for cost savings.

Are point of use tankless water heaters costly? Can they be installed
in any house?

They cost about what tank types do but are supposed to be more efficient in
actual heating if the house has a smaller hot water draw. I pay to keep the
water hot for example, vice a fast 'heat on demand'.

Be sure to check with the owner if you want to convert. You may be required
to 'retrovert' back before leaving as the sort you speak of is seldom useful
when there are many people who need hot water. Savings seem to degrade to
make them more expensive if you have alot of folks who need hot water.

"Edwin Pawlowski" wrote

Well that depends. Where is the lost heat going? If it is going into the

In my case, the lost heat is totally a benefit. It helps heat the garage
and several pipes there burst last year so we had to add a heater. We do
not need to AC the garage in summer, but we have to heat it a bit in winter.

We figured out the change at last. The 'heat unit' was better insulated
while we were gone and the house was rented. This meant less leach hat in
the garage and resulted in a 800$ busted pipe repair last winter. I'm
actually thinking the insulation is costing us more with comparison of a
heater back there, than removal of the added insulation g. Kinda like,
'remove in winter, put back in summer'.

"dpb" wrote
cshenk wrote:

Probably. I just checked and we have a 40G gas unit. House of 3. We do
have to time our showers/tub baths a bit but it is not hard. The
dishwasher has to be accomodated for as well. Nominally need about 20
mins between bath/shower/dishwasher uses.

40G is plenty for one person. Ok for 3 with a little timing.

Something definitely out of whack if a 40 g doesn't cut it for only three.
Raised four kids and wouldn't be able to think of time it was an issue...

Yes, and you are right. It's an older unit and was not maintained at *all*
by the renters. I am pretty sure we are getting about 50% efficency out if
it.

I dont expect anyone to really 'track' all any of our posts to add things up
so I'll add I'm the one who was in Japan almost 7 years with house rented.
I am pretty sure this unit was replaced while we were gone, about 6 years
ago? I bet it has a coil problem of some sort.

We have to unpack the last of the boxes in the garage before we can just
drain it and see what's up. Having only just repaired the 'sunroom' we have
not yet repopulated all the stuff stored in the garage so this isnt an
option to just drain it.

It is very possible the unit is about 7 years old now with zero maintenance.
With regular maintenance, they nominally last 15 years. Not sure what you
can expect with none at all though?

It is not impossible to think we might be getting about the efficency of a
20G unit just now? I only can see it is a 40G and a long shower (over 10
mins) means a reheat time of about 20.

On Sun 24 Aug 2008 09:59:55a, told us...

On Aug 24, 2:01*am, terry wrote:
On Aug 23, 11:11*pm, Claude Hopper
wrote:





RepairNovice wrote:
On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 18:56:24 -0400, Claude Hopper
wrote:

Thanks Claude for your input.

My 50 gal. tank also started leaking a few weeks ago.
It was about 10 years old and as I mentioned I've been renting.

They replaced it with another 50 gal. tank but I'm not happy with
it.
For some reason (I haven't figured it out yet) the replacement tank
can be heard all throughout the house when the water is heating up.

I could never hear the original tank unless I was in the furnace
room
.

So when I ask the company to come back I thought I'd look into
gettin
g a 40 gal. tank instead, for cost savings.

Are point of use tankless water heaters costly? Can they be
installed
in any house?

Thanks!

I paid $144.00 each for my tankless heaters and installed them myself.
They are 25 amps so you need to run 30 amp line to each unit plus
plumb
ing.

I replaced a 40 gallon tank that started leaking with a 20 gallon
an
d had all the hot water I needed for showers and dish washing. I
too
l ive by my self.

Then I moved and had hot water off the boiler coil. That thing ran
1
0 or 15 times a day even if I didn't use any hot water. So I shut
that of f and installed 2 point of use tankless water heaters and
don't regret it a bit. They only run when you actually use them.
One
for the bathroo m sink and shower and another for the kitchen sink.
I love this. The longer you use it the hotter it gets.

--
Claude Hopper *? 3 * * *7/8- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

It's nice to hear that you are well satisfied with tankless hot water
heaters.

There is another do it your self group that frequently has questions
and complaints about them but it also criticises and decries our North
American practice of having a hot water storage tank either heated,
electrically, by gas or from a heating furnace.

230 x 25 amps = 5750 watts. And they only use electricity while water is
being used.


And that is going to supply hot water in sufficient quantity to do
exactly what? He's got one tank type now that supplies his entire
house. With typical incoming water temps in winter in most parts of
the US, 5750watts isn't going to supply enough hot water for even a
decent shower.

Which is why you rarely, if ever, see an electric tankless used as a
whole house solution. If you have gas available, then it's another
story.

Another questionable notion is the idea that the heat loss from a
water heater is less important because it goes to help heat the house
in winter. I think in general, this is simply false. First, much
of the heat loss in a gas heater is up the flue. Second, the heat
that escapes the insulated surfaces of the tank, would go entirely
toward helping heat the house, IF the tank were in the living space.
Don't know about you, but I rarely see water heaters sitting in the
kitchen. Usually, they are in the basement or garage. Let's say
it's in an unfinished basement area, close to an outside wall as they
are usually installed. I'd venture that the amount of the escaping
heat that makes any impact on the energy usage of the house is tiny
compared with the heat that is lost in the basement to the surrounding
walls, etc.

And even if the tank was in the living space, somehow the fact that
this heat is working against you when you have AC running never gets
mentioned.

In short, to the OP, from your water usage situation, I see nothing
wrong with going with a 40 gal unit. That is a very popular size for
homes without the need for large amounts of hot water. Many homes
have them and are not running out of hot water. Besides the initial
cost being less, whatever you save on your energy, every little bit
helps.

I remember back in the 1950s in Cleveland, a popular ad by the gas utility
company was for an "AUI-40", which mean an automatic, underfired,
insulated, 40-gallon tank. It seemed at the time that a 40-gallon tank was
what most people had.

Years later, when I built a new home, we had an 80-gallon tank installed
because we had to Jacuzzi tubs in the bathrooms.

Here in central Arizona where in now live, we have only a 30-gallon tank
because the incoming water is never very cold, in fact, usually on the warm
side, especially in summer. It's an electric tank.

As pointed out you required 30 amp wiring; and 30 amp double pole
circuit breakers to connect them. That's only 10 AWG IIRC. *Not hard
to do usually; but occasionally requires 'bunching up' things
electrically in the main circut breaker panel?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -





--
Wayne Boatwright

*******************************************
Date: Sunday, 08(VIII)/24(XXIV)/08(MMVIII)
*******************************************
Countdown till Labor Day
1wks 10hrs 7mins
*******************************************
A pessimist is a person who mourns the
future.
*******************************************

On Aug 24, 1:42*pm, Bubba wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 09:59:55 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
On Aug 24, 2:01*am, terry wrote:
On Aug 23, 11:11*pm, Claude Hopper
wrote:

RepairNovice wrote:
On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 18:56:24 -0400, Claude Hopper
wrote:

Thanks Claude for your input.

My 50 gal. tank also started leaking a few weeks ago.
It was about 10 years old and as I mentioned I've been renting.

They replaced it with another 50 gal. tank but I'm not happy with it.
For some reason (I haven't figured it out yet) the replacement tank
can be heard all throughout the house when the water is heating up..

I could never hear the original tank unless I was in the furnace room.

So when I ask the company to come back I thought I'd look into getting
a 40 gal. tank instead, for cost savings.

Are point of use tankless water heaters costly? Can they be installed
in any house?

Thanks!

I paid $144.00 each for my tankless heaters and installed them myself.
They are 25 amps so you need to run 30 amp line to each unit plus plumbing.

I replaced a 40 gallon tank that started leaking with a 20 gallon and
had all the hot water I needed for showers and dish washing. I too live
by my self.

Then I moved and had hot water off the boiler coil. That thing ran 10 or
15 times a day even if I didn't use any hot water. So I shut that off
and installed 2 point of use tankless water heaters and don't regret it
a bit. They only run when you actually use them. One for the bathroom
sink and shower and another for the kitchen sink. I love this. The
longer you use it the hotter it gets.

--
Claude Hopper *? 3 * * *7/8- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

It's nice to hear that you are well satisfied with tankless hot water
heaters.

There is another do it your self group that frequently has questions
and complaints about them but it also criticises and decries our North
American practice of having a hot water storage tank either heated,
electrically, by gas or from a heating furnace.

230 x 25 amps = 5750 watts. And they only use electricity while water
is being used.

And that is going to supply hot water in sufficient quantity to do
exactly what? * *He's got one tank type now that supplies his entire
house. * With typical incoming water temps in winter in most parts of
the US, 5750watts isn't going to supply enough hot water for even a
decent shower.

Which is why you rarely, if ever, see an electric tankless used as a
whole house solution.

I guess you dont get out much trader.

And I guess you failed simple math. The poster claimed:

"230 x 25 amps = 5750 watts. And they only use electricity while water
"
is being used."

To which I stated that 5750 watts isn't going to supply enough hot
water for even a decent shower. From your own link, it takes 100
AMPS to get a 73 degree temp rise at 2.25 gallons a minute. At 50
AMPS, the lowest AMP heater in the chart, you get a whopping 36 degree
temp rise at 2.25 gallons a minute. So, with incoming water of even
50 deg, you wind up with 86 deg heated water.

Do the math anyway you want, and as I stated, at 25 amps, you aren't
going to run a shower, much less an entire house, which was what the
OP was trying to do. The electric tankless, by the spec sheet you
provided, are only claimed to be practical for the southern US with
80AMPS. For the rest of the US they need 100 to 150 amps.

Now, how many homes have an extra 100 to 150 amps available for a
water heater? And would you advocate using an electric tankless to
heat water when the OP has natural gas available, which in virtually
all cases is going to be cheaper?

Just because manufacturers make them, don't mean they are popular.
Maybe I overstated the case by saying you rarely, if ever, see them
used. Let me restate it by saying in the vast majority of cases they
are impractical compared to other readily available solutions. And
here in NJ, I've seen lots of new homes recently. A few had tankless,
but every one of them was nat gas tankless. I did not see a single
electric tankless.






Electric tankless are quite
common even in cold climates. Here is just one of them:http://www.e-tankless.com/products.php
Look up all the tankless manufacturers. They all carry electric.
Bubba



If you have gas available, then it's another
story.

Another questionable notion is the idea that the heat loss from a
water heater is less important because it goes to help heat the house
in winter. * I think in general, this is simply false. * First, much
of the heat loss in a gas heater is up the flue. *Second, the heat
that escapes the insulated surfaces of the tank, would go entirely
toward helping heat the house, IF the tank were in the living space.
Don't know about you, but I rarely see water heaters sitting in the
kitchen. * Usually, they are in the basement or garage. * Let's say
it's in an unfinished basement area, close to an outside wall as they
are usually installed. * I'd venture that the amount of the escaping
heat that makes any impact on the energy usage of the house is tiny
compared with the heat that is lost in the basement to the surrounding
walls, etc.

And even if the tank was in the living space, somehow the fact that
this heat is working against you when you have AC running never gets
mentioned.

In short, to the OP, from your water usage situation, I see nothing
wrong with going with a 40 gal unit. * That is a very popular size for
homes without the need for large amounts of hot water. * Many homes
have them and are not running out of hot water. * *Besides the initial
cost being less, whatever you save on your energy, every little bit
helps.

As pointed out you required 30 amp wiring; and 30 amp double pole
circuit breakers to connect them. That's only 10 AWG IIRC. *Not hard
to do usually; but occasionally requires 'bunching up' things
electrically in the main circut breaker panel?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

On Aug 25, 8:14*am, Bubba wrote:

There is another do it your self group that frequently has questions
and complaints about them but it also criticises and decries our North
American practice of having a hot water storage tank either heated,
electrically, by gas or from a heating furnace.

230 x 25 amps = 5750 watts. And they only use electricity while water
is being used.

And that is going to supply hot water in sufficient quantity to do
exactly what? * *He's got one tank type now that supplies his entire
house. * With typical incoming water temps in winter in most parts of
the US, 5750watts isn't going to supply enough hot water for even a
decent shower.

Which is why you rarely, if ever, see an electric tankless used as a
whole house solution.

I guess you dont get out much trader.

And I guess you failed simple math. * The poster claimed:

"230 x 25 amps = 5750 watts. And they only use electricity while water
"
is being used."

To which I stated that 5750 watts isn't going to supply enough hot
water for even a decent shower. * From your own link, it takes 100
AMPS to get a 73 degree temp rise at 2.25 gallons a minute. * At 50
AMPS, the lowest AMP heater in the chart, you get a whopping 36 degree
temp rise at 2.25 gallons a minute. * *So, with incoming water of even
50 deg, you wind up with 86 deg heated water.

Do the math anyway you want, and as I stated, at 25 amps, you aren't
going to run a shower, much less an entire house, which was what the
OP was trying to do. *The electric tankless, by the spec sheet you
provided, are only claimed to be practical for the southern US with
80AMPS. * For the rest of the US they need 100 to 150 amps.

Now, how many homes have an extra 100 to 150 amps available for a
water heater? * And would you advocate using an electric tankless to
heat water when the OP has natural gas available, which in virtually
all cases is going to be cheaper?

Just because manufacturers make them, don't mean they are popular.
Maybe I overstated the case by saying you rarely, if ever, see them
used. * Let me restate it by saying in the vast majority of cases they
are impractical compared to other readily available solutions. *And
here in NJ, I've seen lots of new homes recently. *A few had tankless,
but every one of them was nat gas tankless. *I did not see a single
electric tankless.

Nice math you did there. So impressive. And YES, you did overstate
your case like all you EE's do all the time. I didnt care what
electric he has in his home.

Sure, just ignore the math and that the typical service is 100-200
amps and that in most of the US, to have any reasonable output from an
electric whole house on demand water heater is in excess of 100 AMPS.
So what if the OP has to get a new higher amp service from the street,
a new panel, pay for that installation cost, it doesn't come out of
YOUR pocket, right?



YOU said (and I quote)

**Which is why you rarely, if ever, see an electric tankless used as a
whole house solution. ***

Obviously you live in a trailer or under a rock. The electric is
becoming more and more popular. Its very apparent. When natural gas is
cost is going through the roof with no end in site. Our area alone
will go up 50% this winter in natural gas cost.
Once again, you were WRONG! Say it trader, "You were wrong". You guys
have such a hard time with that phrase.
Bubba



OK, I'd like to put it to a vote. Simple questions:

1 - How many people reading this newsgroup have an ELECTRIC WHOLE
HOUSE WATER HEATER?

2 - How many believe they are a practical. cost effective solution for
a whole house water heater in most single family homes in the US?

On Aug 25, 11:17�am, wrote:
On Aug 25, 8:14�am, Bubba wrote:







There is another do it your self group that frequently has questions
and complaints about them but it also criticises and decries our North
American practice of having a hot water storage tank either heated,
electrically, by gas or from a heating furnace.

230 x 25 amps = 5750 watts. And they only use electricity while water
is being used.

And that is going to supply hot water in sufficient quantity to do
exactly what? � �He's got one tank type now that supplies his entire
house. � With typical incoming water temps in winter in most parts of
the US, 5750watts isn't going to supply enough hot water for even a
decent shower.

Which is why you rarely, if ever, see an electric tankless used as a
whole house solution.

I guess you dont get out much trader.

And I guess you failed simple math. � The poster claimed:

"230 x 25 amps = 5750 watts. And they only use electricity while water
"
is being used."

To which I stated that 5750 watts isn't going to supply enough hot
water for even a decent shower. � From your own link, it takes 100
AMPS to get a 73 degree temp rise at 2.25 gallons a minute. � At 50
AMPS, the lowest AMP heater in the chart, you get a whopping 36 degree
temp rise at 2.25 gallons a minute. � �So, with incoming water of even
50 deg, you wind up with 86 deg heated water.

Do the math anyway you want, and as I stated, at 25 amps, you aren't
going to run a shower, much less an entire house, which was what the
OP was trying to do. �The electric tankless, by the spec sheet you
provided, are only claimed to be practical for the southern US with
80AMPS. � For the rest of the US they need 100 to 150 amps.

Now, how many homes have an extra 100 to 150 amps available for a
water heater? � And would you advocate using an electric tankless to
heat water when the OP has natural gas available, which in virtually
all cases is going to be cheaper?

Just because manufacturers make them, don't mean they are popular.
Maybe I overstated the case by saying you rarely, if ever, see them
used. � Let me restate it by saying in the vast majority of cases they
are impractical compared to other readily available solutions. �And
here in NJ, I've seen lots of new homes recently. �A few had tankless,
but every one of them was nat gas tankless. �I did not see a single
electric tankless.

Nice math you did there. So impressive. And YES, you did overstate
your case like all you EE's do all the time. I didnt care what
electric he has in his home.

Sure, just ignore the math and �that the typical service is 100-200
amps and that in most of the US, to have any reasonable output from an
electric whole house on demand water heater is in excess of 100 AMPS.
So what if the OP has to get a new higher amp service from the street,
a new panel, �pay for that installation cost, it doesn't come out of
YOUR pocket, right?

YOU said (and I quote)



**Which is why you rarely, if ever, see an electric tankless used as a
whole house solution. ***

Obviously you live in a trailer or under a rock. The electric is
becoming more and more popular. Its very apparent. When natural gas is
cost is going through the roof with no end in site. Our area alone
will go up 50% this winter in natural gas cost.
Once again, you were WRONG! Say it trader, "You were wrong". You guys
have such a hard time with that phrase.
Bubba

OK, I'd like to put it to a vote. �Simple questions:

1 - How many people reading this newsgroup have an �ELECTRIC WHOLE
HOUSE WATER HEATER?

2 - How many believe they are a practical. cost effective solution for
a whole house water heater in most single family homes in the US?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

much electric power is generated by burning oil or natural gas,
electric costs are going up, just a little delay..........

electric is generally accepted as costing more than natural gas, oil,
and even coal.

electric tankless where incoming water is cold, like 40 degrees, and
people want to run more than one shower at a time REQUIRES a dedicated
200 amp service just to heat water, seperate 200 or 100 amp service
for all other uses.

this requires a large upgrade, utility company cooperation, very
costly and more so where service line to homes are underground. the
tankless companies themselves recommend putting 2 units in series for
such applications......

sure it can be done if you dont mind spending boatloads of money

On Aug 25, 2:32*pm, Bubba wrote:
On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 08:17:56 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
On Aug 25, 8:14*am, Bubba wrote:

There is another do it your self group that frequently has questions
and complaints about them but it also criticises and decries our North
American practice of having a hot water storage tank either heated,
electrically, by gas or from a heating furnace.

230 x 25 amps = 5750 watts. And they only use electricity while water
is being used.

And that is going to supply hot water in sufficient quantity to do
exactly what? * *He's got one tank type now that supplies his entire
house. * With typical incoming water temps in winter in most parts of
the US, 5750watts isn't going to supply enough hot water for even a
decent shower.

Which is why you rarely, if ever, see an electric tankless used as a
whole house solution.

I guess you dont get out much trader.

And I guess you failed simple math. * The poster claimed:

"230 x 25 amps = 5750 watts. And they only use electricity while water
"
is being used."

To which I stated that 5750 watts isn't going to supply enough hot
water for even a decent shower. * From your own link, it takes 100
AMPS to get a 73 degree temp rise at 2.25 gallons a minute. * At 50
AMPS, the lowest AMP heater in the chart, you get a whopping 36 degree
temp rise at 2.25 gallons a minute. * *So, with incoming water of even
50 deg, you wind up with 86 deg heated water.

Do the math anyway you want, and as I stated, at 25 amps, you aren't
going to run a shower, much less an entire house, which was what the
OP was trying to do. *The electric tankless, by the spec sheet you
provided, are only claimed to be practical for the southern US with
80AMPS. * For the rest of the US they need 100 to 150 amps.

Now, how many homes have an extra 100 to 150 amps available for a
water heater? * And would you advocate using an electric tankless to
heat water when the OP has natural gas available, which in virtually
all cases is going to be cheaper?

Just because manufacturers make them, don't mean they are popular.
Maybe I overstated the case by saying you rarely, if ever, see them
used. * Let me restate it by saying in the vast majority of cases they
are impractical compared to other readily available solutions. *And
here in NJ, I've seen lots of new homes recently. *A few had tankless,
but every one of them was nat gas tankless. *I did not see a single
electric tankless.

Nice math you did there. So impressive. And YES, you did overstate
your case like all you EE's do all the time. I didnt care what
electric he has in his home.

Sure, just ignore the math and *that the typical service is 100-200
amps and that in most of the US, to have any reasonable output from an
electric whole house on demand water heater is in excess of 100 AMPS.
So what if the OP has to get a new higher amp service from the street,
a new panel, *pay for that installation cost, it doesn't come out of
YOUR pocket, right?

I cant help it if you live in a trailer. Believe it or not there are a
LOT of people out there with money.


And that has exactly what to do with how practical or common it is to
find whole house electric tankless water heaters?


I install and service it for them
everyday. How about a home with 7 GeoThermal systems! Yes, thats a
home. It is commonplace.


Now you're really showing who's seriously out of touch. A home with 7
GeoThermal systems is common? LOL.



Boggles my mind everyday but its there, it
happens and people have the money to pay for it..


And this has what again to do with the thread? You claim to be in
the trade. The OP stated the situation. He currently has a single
50 gal natural gas water heater in his single family home hat he needs
to replace. He's considering moving down to a 40 gallon to save a
bit. How many customers have you had in that situation that went to
an electric tankless? And if there are any, please tell us how many
amps and how it fit into the overall electric capacity of the house.
And how much time would you spend scoping out and quoting a customer
an electric tankless install in that situation?

I already gave you my answer. It may happen, but it's rare. And as
I've stated, over the last couple years, I've looked at 100+ homes
here in NJ, which I'd say is an average climate. I'd say 100+ homes
is a decent sample size. About half of them were new construction.
And since you dragged cost into it, they were all over $800K, about
half were $1mil+. I saw maybe 2 that had tankless period. And
not one of those was an electric tankless, for obvious reasons.









YOU said (and I quote)

**Which is why you rarely, if ever, see an electric tankless used as a
whole house solution. ***

Obviously you live in a trailer or under a rock. The electric is
becoming more and more popular. Its very apparent. When natural gas is
cost is going through the roof with no end in site. Our area alone
will go up 50% this winter in natural gas cost.
Once again, you were WRONG! Say it trader, "You were wrong". You guys
have such a hard time with that phrase.
Bubba

OK, I'd like to put it to a vote. *Simple questions:

1 - How many people reading this newsgroup have an *ELECTRIC WHOLE
HOUSE WATER HEATER?

2 - How many believe they are a practical. cost effective solution for
a whole house water heater in most single family homes in the US?

Simple questions for a simple-minded simpleton.
How is it you think that a couple people answering a newsgroup
qualifies for an accurate accounting of the whole house electric on
demand water heaters in your area, my area or the whole country?


Pay attention. I didn't say it was an accurate accounting. But if
indeed electric whole house tankless are as common in homes as you
claim, we should hear from some folks. I see questions here all the
time from folks using electic storage, gas storage, oil storage, gas
tankless, etc. Can't recall anyone that actually has an electric
whole house tankless. I recall people asking about them, but not
anyone who actually has one. Not saying they don't exist, only that
they are in fact not common. Afraid of a simple question?

On Aug 25, 6:07*pm, Bubba wrote:
On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 13:09:19 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
On Aug 25, 2:32*pm, Bubba wrote:
On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 08:17:56 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
On Aug 25, 8:14*am, Bubba wrote:

There is another do it your self group that frequently has questions
and complaints about them but it also criticises and decries our North
American practice of having a hot water storage tank either heated,
electrically, by gas or from a heating furnace.

230 x 25 amps = 5750 watts. And they only use electricity while water
is being used.

And that is going to supply hot water in sufficient quantity to do
exactly what? * *He's got one tank type now that supplies his entire
house. * With typical incoming water temps in winter in most parts of
the US, 5750watts isn't going to supply enough hot water for even a
decent shower.

Which is why you rarely, if ever, see an electric tankless used as a
whole house solution.

I guess you dont get out much trader.

And I guess you failed simple math. * The poster claimed:

"230 x 25 amps = 5750 watts. And they only use electricity while water
"
is being used."

To which I stated that 5750 watts isn't going to supply enough hot
water for even a decent shower. * From your own link, it takes 100
AMPS to get a 73 degree temp rise at 2.25 gallons a minute. * At 50
AMPS, the lowest AMP heater in the chart, you get a whopping 36 degree
temp rise at 2.25 gallons a minute. * *So, with incoming water of even
50 deg, you wind up with 86 deg heated water.

Do the math anyway you want, and as I stated, at 25 amps, you aren't
going to run a shower, much less an entire house, which was what the
OP was trying to do. *The electric tankless, by the spec sheet you
provided, are only claimed to be practical for the southern US with
80AMPS. * For the rest of the US they need 100 to 150 amps.

Now, how many homes have an extra 100 to 150 amps available for a
water heater? * And would you advocate using an electric tankless to
heat water when the OP has natural gas available, which in virtually
all cases is going to be cheaper?

Just because manufacturers make them, don't mean they are popular.
Maybe I overstated the case by saying you rarely, if ever, see them
used. * Let me restate it by saying in the vast majority of cases they
are impractical compared to other readily available solutions. *And
here in NJ, I've seen lots of new homes recently. *A few had tankless,
but every one of them was nat gas tankless. *I did not see a single
electric tankless.

Nice math you did there. So impressive. And YES, you did overstate
your case like all you EE's do all the time. I didnt care what
electric he has in his home.

Sure, just ignore the math and *that the typical service is 100-200
amps and that in most of the US, to have any reasonable output from an
electric whole house on demand water heater is in excess of 100 AMPS.
So what if the OP has to get a new higher amp service from the street,
a new panel, *pay for that installation cost, it doesn't come out of
YOUR pocket, right?

I cant help it if you live in a trailer. Believe it or not there are a
LOT of people out there with money.

And that has exactly what to do with how practical or common it is to
find whole house electric tankless water heaters?

Wow! You are dense. It appears you dont live in an area where anyone
has anything "above average". Your loss. You should get out once in a
while.



I install and service it for them
everyday. How about a home with 7 GeoThermal systems! Yes, thats a
home. It is commonplace.

Now you're really showing who's seriously out of touch. *A home with 7
GeoThermal systems is common? * LOL.

Tell me where I said it is "common". Now it appears you cant read
either.


It's quoted right above for you. Here it is again,exactly what you
posted:

"How about a home with 7 GeoThermal systems! Yes, thats a home. It is
commonplace."




By the way, around here, lots of people have actual full size
pools in their home. Not a pool in a screened in enclosure but in
their basement. Ive got one that even has one on his roof. Some have
basketball courts. Unfortunately, I dont have that kind of money but
sure is neat to see how the other half live. Very nice customers too.
They dont haggle over $100.

And again, this has zippo to do with electric tankless water heaters.







Boggles my mind everyday but its there, it
happens and people have the money to pay for it..

And this has what again to do with the thread? *

Because you cant seem to get it through your pea-brained head that
other people live better than you. MUCH MUCH better. Your little
postage stamp of the world is just a spec.


I would say you can't get it through your head that living better has
very little to do with electric tankless water heaters. Maybe that's
on your dream list of things you want to have, but clearly not on most
normal people's radar map.




You claim to be in
the trade.

Hey, you finally got something right.

*The OP stated the situation. *He currently has a single
50 gal natural gas water heater in his single family home hat he needs
to replace. * He's considering moving down to a 40 gallon to save a
bit. * How many customers have you had in that situation that went to
an electric tankless? * And if there are any, please tell us how many
amps and how it fit into the overall electric capacity of the house.
And how much time would you spend scoping out and quoting a customer
an electric tankless install in that situation?

Of course it isnt an everyday occurance.

Gee, a minute a go electric tankless was a common thing in a single
family home. So were 7 geo themal systems.



But you made it out that it
never happens. Again, you were wrong and you cant stand to admit it.



I already gave you my answer. * It may happen, but it's rare.

No actually what you said was:
***Which is why you rarely, if ever, see an electric tankless used as
a whole house solution.****
You should learn to "Never say Never". It will always bite you in the
ass.

Yes, and I corrected that in the very next post to "Let me restate it
by saying in the vast majority of cases they
are impractical compared to other readily available solutions. "
Which I stand by.

You on the other hand, chose to go on the attack on me. You even had
the gall to try to hurl insults because I did the simple math that
showed the post that started all this discussion of electric tankless
whole house was full of baloney. That poster went through an example
suggesting a system using 25 amps, which any damn fool knows is off by
on the order of 4 to 6 times. You let that go by the wayside, but
jump on me, for pointing out the simple physics don't work out. That
obviously is beyond your math level, which is why you feel the need to
slam engineers.




*And as
I've stated, over the last couple years, I've looked at 100+ homes
here in NJ, which I'd say is an average climate. *I'd say 100+ homes
is a decent sample size. *About half of them were new construction.
And since you dragged cost into it, they were all over $800K, about
half were $1mil+. * * I saw maybe 2 that had tankless period. * * And
not one of those was an electric tankless, for obvious reasons.

and in this area, tankless is becoming more and more popular. I have
people ripping out oil and gas furnaces and putting in heat pumps.
Gas and oil is expensive here. Electric is too but not considered as
bad.


And just for clarification, why don't you share exactly where that is?

Also, tankless is becoming more popular here too. Five years ago,
instead of seeing 2, I would have seen zero. So, what? We were
talking about the practicality of a 40 or 50 gallon natural gas
storage tank in an existing single family home vs an ELECTRIC
tankless. Got it now?

So, what should the OP do? He needs to replace a 50 gallon natural
gas storage unit. He's considering going down to a 40. And you say,
he should do exactly what? Put in an electric tankless? Simple
question, in most cases like this is it practical and cost effective
to put in an electric tankless for the whole single family house, yes
or no?

On Aug 25, 10:09*pm, Bubba wrote:
On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 15:44:28 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
On Aug 25, 6:07*pm, Bubba wrote:
On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 13:09:19 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
On Aug 25, 2:32*pm, Bubba wrote:
On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 08:17:56 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
On Aug 25, 8:14*am, Bubba wrote:

There is another do it your self group that frequently has questions
and complaints about them but it also criticises and decries our North
American practice of having a hot water storage tank either heated,
electrically, by gas or from a heating furnace.

230 x 25 amps = 5750 watts. And they only use electricity while water
is being used.

And that is going to supply hot water in sufficient quantity to do
exactly what? * *He's got one tank type now that supplies his entire
house. * With typical incoming water temps in winter in most parts of
the US, 5750watts isn't going to supply enough hot water for even a
decent shower.

Which is why you rarely, if ever, see an electric tankless used as a
whole house solution.

I guess you dont get out much trader.

And I guess you failed simple math. * The poster claimed:

"230 x 25 amps = 5750 watts. And they only use electricity while water
"
is being used."

To which I stated that 5750 watts isn't going to supply enough hot
water for even a decent shower. * From your own link, it takes 100
AMPS to get a 73 degree temp rise at 2.25 gallons a minute. * At 50
AMPS, the lowest AMP heater in the chart, you get a whopping 36 degree
temp rise at 2.25 gallons a minute. * *So, with incoming water of even
50 deg, you wind up with 86 deg heated water.

Do the math anyway you want, and as I stated, at 25 amps, you aren't
going to run a shower, much less an entire house, which was what the
OP was trying to do. *The electric tankless, by the spec sheet you
provided, are only claimed to be practical for the southern US with
80AMPS. * For the rest of the US they need 100 to 150 amps.

Now, how many homes have an extra 100 to 150 amps available for a
water heater? * And would you advocate using an electric tankless to
heat water when the OP has natural gas available, which in virtually
all cases is going to be cheaper?

Just because manufacturers make them, don't mean they are popular.
Maybe I overstated the case by saying you rarely, if ever, see them
used. * Let me restate it by saying in the vast majority of cases they
are impractical compared to other readily available solutions. *And
here in NJ, I've seen lots of new homes recently. *A few had tankless,
but every one of them was nat gas tankless. *I did not see a single
electric tankless.

Nice math you did there. So impressive. And YES, you did overstate
your case like all you EE's do all the time. I didnt care what
electric he has in his home.

Sure, just ignore the math and *that the typical service is 100-200
amps and that in most of the US, to have any reasonable output from an
electric whole house on demand water heater is in excess of 100 AMPS.
So what if the OP has to get a new higher amp service from the street,
a new panel, *pay for that installation cost, it doesn't come out of
YOUR pocket, right?

I cant help it if you live in a trailer. Believe it or not there are a
LOT of people out there with money.

And that has exactly what to do with how practical or common it is to
find whole house electric tankless water heaters?

Wow! You are dense. It appears you dont live in an area where anyone
has anything "above average". Your loss. You should get out once in a
while.

I install and service it for them
everyday. How about a home with 7 GeoThermal systems! Yes, thats a
home. It is commonplace.

Now you're really showing who's seriously out of touch. *A home with 7
GeoThermal systems is common? * LOL.

Tell me where I said it is "common". Now it appears you cant read
either.

It's quoted right above for you. * Here it is again,exactly what you
posted:

"How about a home with 7 GeoThermal systems! Yes, thats a home. It is
commonplace."

Trader, It is common in the city it is in. Mega money town. Its about
20-25 mins from my town. In my town only one Geo per home is common.
Again, only 20 mins away is a totally different world than where I
live. It seems to be something you cant quite seem to grasp.


I can grasp that you're so deceptive that you won't even give us an
idea of what city or state you're living in. Of course, if you did
so, then it would be much easier for folks to evaluate your bogus
claims, determine what energy really costs and figure out that you're
full of baloney.






By the way, around here, lots of people have actual full size
pools in their home. Not a pool in a screened in enclosure but in
their basement. Ive got one that even has one on his roof. Some have
basketball courts. Unfortunately, I dont have that kind of money but
sure is neat to see how the other half live. Very nice customers too.
They dont haggle over $100.

And again, this has zippo to do with electric tankless water heaters.

And again, just trying to get you to step out of your own little world
in a trailer and understand that there are many people out there that
can afford a whole house on demand electric water heater. Also lots of
people than can afford to pay to heat no only their home but also
there outdoor sidewalk and driveway to melt the snow.





Boggles my mind everyday but its there, it
happens and people have the money to pay for it..

And this has what again to do with the thread? *

Because you cant seem to get it through your pea-brained head that
other people live better than you. MUCH MUCH better. Your little
postage stamp of the world is just a spec.

I would say you can't get it through your head that living better has
very little to do with electric tankless water heaters. * Maybe that's
on your dream list of things you want to have, but clearly not on most
normal people's radar map.

Well, it certainly appears you cant afford one. It seems that as you
say it isnt common because it is considered too expensive.

So now we're back to it's not common. Good to see you finally agree.


Obviously,
too expensive for you but not for others. Does that make you jealous?
Get over it.



Again, it's not that it's too expensive. It's that it's expensive
and IMPRACTICAL compared to other readily available solutions. Even
if you don't care about costs, in the vast majority of cases, there
are far more practical solutions, like gas tankless or large or
multiple storage tank solutions.


I asked you, who claim to be knowledgable and in the trade, a direct
question that was the point of the whole thread you did not answer:

"So, what should the OP do? He needs to replace a 50 gallon natural
gas storage unit. He's considering going down to a 40. And you
say,
he should do exactly what? Put in an electric tankless? Simple
question, in most cases like this is it practical and cost effective
to put in an electric tankless for the whole single family house, yes
or no? "














You claim to be in
the trade.

Hey, you finally got something right.

*The OP stated the situation. *He currently has a single
50 gal natural gas water heater in his single family home hat he needs
to replace. * He's considering moving down to a 40 gallon to save a
bit. * How many customers have you had in that situation that went to
an electric tankless? * And if there are any, please tell us how many
amps and how it fit into the overall electric capacity of the house.
And how much time would you spend scoping out and quoting a customer
an electric tankless install in that situation?

Of course it isnt an everyday occurance.

Gee, a minute a go electric tankless was a common thing in a single
family home. * So were 7 geo themal systems.

Yes, it is common around my area. Step OUT of the box trader.


And again, unlike you, most of us here aren't afraid to say where "our
area" is, because we're honest and have no need to hide. When you
hide, you can make up demographics, incomes, energy costs, climate,
anything you want.










But you made it out that it
never happens. Again, you were wrong and you cant stand to admit it.

I already gave you my answer. * It may happen, but it's rare.

No actually what you said was:
***Which is why you rarely, if ever, see an electric tankless used as
a whole house solution.****
You should learn to "Never say Never". It will always bite you in the
ass.

Yes, and I corrected that in the very next post *to "Let me restate it
by saying in the vast majority of cases they
are impractical compared to other readily available solutions. "
Which I stand by.

You're mighty big on restating. They usually call that
"back-peddling". That seems to be one thing I found that you are quite
good at.

You on the other hand, chose to go on the attack on me. * You even had
the gall to try to hurl insults because I did the simple math that
showed the post that started all this discussion of electric tankless
whole house was full of baloney. * That poster went through an example
suggesting a system using 25 amps, which any damn fool knows is off by
on the order of 4 to 6 times. * * *You let that go by the wayside, but
jump on me, for pointing out the simple physics don't work out. * That
obviously is beyond your math level, which is why you feel the need to
slam engineers.

MyMy Trader. This is the internet. You I thought would have learned by
now to put on your magic underwear and be prepared for a little heated
discussion once in a while and not whine so much. Its only words.
Believe it or not you will survive. If you cant handle the heat, grow
a set of balls or run out of here with your tail between your legs and
dont let the door hit you in the ass on the way out. Ive not heard
such whinner in a long time. Get over it.



Yes, it's the internet, where posters like you are unfortunately all
too common. I'll let others judge who is the deceptive poster who
often turns what were valid discussion threads into flame wars by
going on the attack for no reason.

On Aug 24, 2:59*pm, wrote:
In part:
Quote:
Another questionable notion is the idea that the heat loss from a
water heater is less important because it goes to help heat the house
in winter. * I think in general, this is simply false. * First, much
of the heat loss in a gas heater is up the flue. *Second, the heat
that escapes the insulated surfaces of the tank, would go entirely
toward helping heat the house, IF the tank were in the living space.
Don't know about you, but I rarely see water heaters sitting in the
kitchen. * Usually, they are in the basement or garage. * Let's say
it's in an unfinished basement area, close to an outside wall as they
are usually installed. * I'd venture that the amount of the escaping
heat that makes any impact on the energy usage of the house is tiny
compared with the heat that is lost in the basement to the surrounding
walls, etc.

And even if the tank was in the living space, somehow the fact that
this heat is working against you when you have AC running never gets
mentioned.

End quote

I agree those are completely valid points. And anything that 'burns'
fuel, be it oil, gas, wood etc. loses heat 'up the chimney' or 'out
the vent'! That is a factor of 'it's efficiency.

1) The heat lost from the surface of the hot water unit MAY help to
heat the house, in winter. Our 40 gal electric is in the almost
completely below ground basement and away from outside walls. Foam
insulated it doesn't seem to lose much heat anyway.

2) In this climate we do not need or install AC. There are maybe? 3
days a year when it might be usable. But as trad says if it were
factor at all it could 'work against' the AC.

It's good though to see that these points are being mentioned and
evaluated, in context.

In a similar way that my neighbour has, almost blindly, replaced most/
all his light bulbs with CFLs. They do use less electricity. But since
he heats his house electrically, for here, at least 8 months of the
year, his average monthly electrcity bill has hardly, if at all,
changed. And one is not recommended to use CFLs in anything that is
switched on and off frequently. So that includes his motion sensor
lights.