a friend of mine was telling me that there is a new product that keeps constant hot water in your house. instead of a typical (bulky) hot water heater, this new small product takes it's place. i don't have a clue what it's called. does anyone have any info on this? a web site?

thank you

WHoME? wrote:
a friend of mine was telling me that there is a new product that
keeps constant hot water in your house. instead of a typical (bulky)
hot water heater, this new small product takes it's place. i don't
have a clue what it's called. does anyone have any info on this? a
web site?

thank you

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&i...ter+heaters%22

Tankless dont keep hot water they are on demand heaters and wont run
out. Electric for most is double the price of gas. Look into a Bosch
Aquastar. A recirculator pump will keep hot water in pipes, but you
waiste energy.

On Mon, 2 Aug 2004 08:54:00 -0700, "WHoME?"
wrote:

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

Pretty please turn off the HTML. There's probably a checkbox
somewhere in your newsreader. It doesn't help you and it causes
problems with other newsreaders (see below what happens to your post).

But to answer your question, the concept isn't all that new. I have
an older oil burner/steam heat system with on-demand hot water. The
disadvantages to my setup are 1) you can't run several hot water uses
at once and 2) I have to leave the furnace on all year. The
advantages are 1) I never run out of hot water (except for the time my
furnace stopped working) and 2) I have a very dry basement- no
dankness at all even in the humid summer or wet season (because the
furnace is on all year). Right now it's dang humid on the first and
second floor (even w/my poor AC, on it's last legs) the basement is
not.

------=_NextPart_000_0030_01C4786E.410B1EC0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

a friend of mine was telling me that there is a new product that keeps =
constant hot water in your house. instead of a typical (bulky) hot water =
heater, this new small product takes it's place. i don't have a clue =
what it's called. does anyone have any info on this? a web site?

thank you
------=_NextPart_000_0030_01C4786E.410B1EC0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"
HTMLHEAD
META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1"
META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1458" name=3DGENERATOR
STYLE/STYLE
/HEAD
BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff
DIVFONT face=3DArial size=3D2a friend of mine was telling me that =
there is a new=20
product that keeps constant hot water in your house. instead of a =
typical=20
(bulky) hot water heater, this new small product takes it's place. i =
don't have=20
a clue what it's called. does anyone have any info on this? a web=20
site?/FONT/DIV
DIVFONT face=3DArial size=3D2/FONT /DIV
DIVFONT face=3DArial size=3D2thank you/FONT/DIV/BODY/HTML

------=_NextPart_000_0030_01C4786E.410B1EC0--


Sue(tm)
Lead me not into temptation... I can find it myself!

sorry about the HTML..... i hope i fixed it.

i'm also wondering if the cost is that considerably different? (as far as a
monthly billing on your energy goes).

WHoME? wrote:
sorry about the HTML..... i hope i fixed it.

i'm also wondering if the cost is that considerably different? (as
far as a monthly billing on your energy goes).

It shouldn't be considerably different.

It takes 1 British Thermal Unit (BTU) to raise 1lb of water 1 degree F.
Whether you heat it all at the same time (tank) or continuously
(tankless) doesn't matter in terms of energy consumed. Obviously a tank
heater will have some storage loss, but I wouldn't expect that to be
"considerable" from an energy use point of view.

Travis Jordan wrote:

WHoME? wrote:
sorry about the HTML..... i hope i fixed it.

i'm also wondering if the cost is that considerably different? (as
far as a monthly billing on your energy goes).

It shouldn't be considerably different.

It takes 1 British Thermal Unit (BTU) to raise 1lb of water 1 degree F.
Whether you heat it all at the same time (tank) or continuously
(tankless) doesn't matter in terms of energy consumed. Obviously a tank
heater will have some storage loss, but I wouldn't expect that to be
"considerable" from an energy use point of view.

Actually, it is considerable. I have installed 7 of these whole
house tankless water heaters and they claim to lower your bills by a
considerable amount. The tank type heaters must keep the water at
temperature constantly, i.e; all night, all day while you are at
work, while you are on vacation, etc. The tankless designs only
heat water when it is needed.

According to the literature, 25% of your gas consumption is for the
water heater and they claim to cut that 25% in half, at the least.

Due to the higher cost of these units, it takes a while to recover
the extra costs, but then you have the savings as long as you have
the unit.

--
Robert Allison
Rimshot, Inc.
Georgetown, TX

Actually, it is considerable. I have installed 7 of these whole
house tankless water heaters and they claim to lower your bills by a
considerable amount. The tank type heaters must keep the water at
temperature constantly, i.e; all night, all day while you are at
work, while you are on vacation, etc. The tankless designs only
heat water when it is needed.

According to the literature, 25% of your gas consumption is for the
water heater and they claim to cut that 25% in half, at the least.

Due to the higher cost of these units, it takes a while to recover
the extra costs, but then you have the savings as long as you have
the unit.

--
Robert Allison
Rimshot, Inc.
Georgetown, TX

if i want one for my master bedroom , where would i install it? i don't
have a clue where and how they are installed.. are they simpe to install?

On Mon, 2 Aug 2004 13:01:52 -0700, "WHoME?"
wrote:


sorry about the HTML..... i hope i fixed it.

Yes, thanks :

i'm also wondering if the cost is that considerably different? (as far as a
monthly billing on your energy goes).

I don't know. It's an old system that was here when I moved in. I'd
have to factor in that my hot water system is oil and the rest of my
energy use is electric (and a small amount of gas for stove and
dryer). My guess would be that in the winter when the furnace is on,
the hot water production would be really cheap, whereas in the summer
I'd have to balance keeping the furnace on vs. the cost of running a
dehumidifier in the basement.

Oh, another advantage of the instant on- since I have an interior oil
tank it saves me space in the basement by not having yet another tank!
OTOH, a disadvantage, at least with mine, is that it takes some
fiddling to get the water temperature correct. Mine works by mixing
hot (HOT! SCALDING! REALLY, REALLY HOT!) water from the boiler with
cold water. When I moved in the faucets were putting out 190+
water... I had to go back and forth a bit with the mixing valve to get
it to 130-ish. I imagine that with a stand-alone system you wouldn't
have that problem.

My system is installed in the basement and produces hot water for the
whole house.

Sue(tm)
Lead me not into temptation... I can find it myself!

Robert Allison wrote:


Travis Jordan wrote:

WHoME? wrote:

sorry about the HTML..... i hope i fixed it.

i'm also wondering if the cost is that considerably different? (as
far as a monthly billing on your energy goes).

It shouldn't be considerably different.

It takes 1 British Thermal Unit (BTU) to raise 1lb of water 1 degree F.
Whether you heat it all at the same time (tank) or continuously
(tankless) doesn't matter in terms of energy consumed. Obviously a tank
heater will have some storage loss, but I wouldn't expect that to be
"considerable" from an energy use point of view.


Actually, it is considerable. I have installed 7 of these whole
house tankless water heaters and they claim to lower your bills by a
considerable amount. The tank type heaters must keep the water at
temperature constantly, i.e; all night, all day while you are at
work, while you are on vacation, etc. The tankless designs only
heat water when it is needed.

According to the literature, 25% of your gas consumption is for the
water heater and they claim to cut that 25% in half, at the least.

Due to the higher cost of these units, it takes a while to recover
the extra costs, but then you have the savings as long as you have
the unit.

If the insulation on the hot water tank were perfect, the burner would
come on, heat up the water and stay off until some hot water was used.
So with perfect insulation the only energy consumed is what gets put in
the water minus any inefficiencies which are the same in a tankless and
a tank heater.

actually one of the biggest losses isnt through the tank at all. its
through the pipes going into it, particularly the cold water pipe. you can
check this yourself. go feel the inlet pipe right next to the heater and
move your hand away. it gets colder. while its somewhat intuitive to
insulate the hot water line, you should insulate 5' of the cold water inlet
pipe as well.

randy

If the insulation on the hot water tank were perfect, the burner would
come on, heat up the water and stay off until some hot water was used.
So with perfect insulation the only energy consumed is what gets put in
the water minus any inefficiencies which are the same in a tankless and
a tank heater.

Tanks loose efficiency from day 1 with scale buildup, Tankless dont and
last 2-3 times longer. I removed a 5 yr old electric , high insulated
Rheem with a blanket and reduced bills from 30 electric to 6 in gas.
Considering electric to be double the cost of gas I still lowered my
bill 50% + . My payback on the Bosch is 3 yrs. Apx 1/3 of gas used is
for water heating, that is alot of gas , a cost I view as money going
down the drain. Gas tankless are better than ever, they have been
standard in most countries for over 20 years they are a true quality
alternative we are only now leaning about. Bosch and Takagi make units
for most any home and are quality. They even have units that require no
electricity for ignition, one uses batteries, 2 D cells, mine are 2.5
yrs old and just tested with maybe 2 yrs left. And one with a mini Hydro
generator and remote upstairs thermostat. They are really worth
considering.

Not only is pipe standby loss great but the flue loss may be greater
as to its larger diameter and air convection to the outdoors, it is also
an uninsulated area. Tankless win on this area again.

WHoME? wrote:

Actually, it is considerable. I have installed 7 of these whole
house tankless water heaters and they claim to lower your bills by a
considerable amount. The tank type heaters must keep the water at
temperature constantly, i.e; all night, all day while you are at
work, while you are on vacation, etc. The tankless designs only
heat water when it is needed.

According to the literature, 25% of your gas consumption is for the
water heater and they claim to cut that 25% in half, at the least.

Due to the higher cost of these units, it takes a while to recover
the extra costs, but then you have the savings as long as you have
the unit.


if i want one for my master bedroom , where would i install it? i don't
have a clue where and how they are installed.. are they simpe to install?

If you want to just do your master bath, then you could go with a
point of use model. These are available in electric models. I just
put one in a full bath (shower & sink). I installed it in the
vanity cabinet. The unit was about $200 and it required cutting
into the wall and reworking the plumbing. I had to bring a 220
volt line in also. Took about a day to do everything.

I got the unit from Niagara. Here is their website:

http://www.tanklesswaterheater.com/

I installed a 220 volt unit, but they have 120 volt units also.

As a test, I turned the shower on full hot and left it running for
an hour and a half. It produced very hot water for the entire
time. I turned the unit down a notch because it was a little on the
TOO hot side.

--
Robert Allison
Rimshot, Inc.
Georgetown, TX

yup. next time im going tankless.

randy

"m Ransley" wrote in message
...
Not only is pipe standby loss great but the flue loss may be greater
as to its larger diameter and air convection to the outdoors, it is also
an uninsulated area. Tankless win on this area again.