Home Page link

Most efficient water heater?

HVAC Discussions - Heating, ventilation and air conditioning. 

Page 4 of 9       < 1 2 3 > last >> Bookmark this page:  YahooMyWeb Yahoo!  Google Google  Windows Live Favorites Windows Live  del.icio.us del.icio.us  digg digg  Add to Netscape Netscape
Subject Author Date
Most efficient water heater? Don Wiss 03-16-2008
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
Posted by ransley on March 19, 2008, 7:32 am
> ransley wrote:
> >>> I challenge you to find a water heater efficiency rating NOT in this
> >>> 36-page listing for a water heater currently sold in the USA.
> >>>http://tinyurl.com/38eh4d
> >>> (long url)
> >>>http://www.gamanet.org/gama/inforesources.nsf/vAttachmentLaunch/C2AAF..=
.
> >> Where's the A.O. Smith Vertex model GPHE-50 that Bubba recommended?
>
> >> Don <www.donwiss.com> (e-mail link at home page bottom).
>
> > I saw one unit near the bottom with an Energy Factor of 70, only a few
> > in the 60s and most in the 50-60 range. Vertex, I have a several year
> > old similar AO condensing ccommercial unit but I only know its 92%
> > efficent or so
>
> I am aware of no water heater approaching 92% efficiency. Way too many
> losses to achieve that.. Even Boiler technology can't do that yet>
>
> --
> Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com- Hide quoted =
text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

92-93-94 even 98% water heaters are common even 96% boilers, even a
94% tankless. AO Smith Cyclone tank, Takagi tankless and a Canadian
firm makes a 98% commercial hw boiler, 5 years ago I installed at my
apt a 92% 1900000 btu AO Smith Cyclone. these are all condensing
units,

Posted by Donna Ohl on March 20, 2008, 12:51 am
On Wed, 19 Mar 2008 04:32:02 -0700 (PDT), ransley wrote:

> 98% water heaters are common even 96% boilers

I think the reason for this is somewhat misleading.

If I understand this correctly, almost all the heat energy put into an
electric heater gets put into the water. Basically, the water cools the
heater coils down by taking the heat off the heater coil.

In the case of a gas water heater, the water cools down the flame by taking
heat off the flame (figuratively speaking) but a LOT of heat goes up the
flue.

They baffle the flue to slow down the rising air but they have to let the
hot air out. If they cooled the hot air to room temperature, it wouldn't
rise and get out of the house and that would be a bad thing from the
standpoint of carbon monoxide poisoning.

So, I think the fact that all none of the heat energy that went into the
electric coils goes up any flue - it's all absorbed by the water - is what
makes the electric water heater 98% efficiency.

But, as someone stated, I suspect the power generation is about 70%
efficiency, so, the true efficiency of electric water heating must be
vastly lower than 98% taking distribution into account.

But, how can we account for that true efficiency?

Donna

Posted by ransley on March 20, 2008, 1:22 am
> On Wed, 19 Mar 2008 04:32:02 -0700 (PDT), ransley wrote:
> > 98% water heaters are common even 96% boilers
>
> I think the reason for this is somewhat misleading.
>
> If I understand this correctly, almost all the heat energy put into an
> electric heater gets put into the water. Basically, the water cools the
> heater coils down by taking the heat off the heater coil.
>
> In the case of a gas water heater, the water cools down the flame by takin=
g
> heat off the flame (figuratively speaking) but a LOT of heat goes up the
> flue.
>
> They baffle the flue to slow down the rising air but they have to let the
> hot air out. If they cooled the hot air to room temperature, it wouldn't
> rise and get out of the house and that would be a bad thing from the
> standpoint of carbon monoxide poisoning.
>
> So, I think the fact that all none of the heat energy that went into the
> electric coils goes up any flue - it's all absorbed by the water - is what=

> makes the electric water heater 98% efficiency.
>
> But, as someone stated, I suspect the power generation is about 70%
> efficiency, so, the true efficiency of electric water heating must be
> vastly lower than 98% taking distribution into account.
>
> But, how can we account for that true efficiency?
>
> Donna

Electric are all 100% efficent, all energy consumed is used to heat
water, and energy factor should be near 100 as well with great
insulation. Almost all gas water heaters burners are about 80-83%
efficent, but an additional 17-20% goes up the chimney 24 hrs a day,
Energy Factor ratings account for loss up the center uninsulated flue
part of the tank and reflect overall efficency, which for most gas
tank is 50-60 with one I saw of 70. Condensing gas water heaters,
Boilers, furnaces, are different, have a second exchanger that lowers
flue temp to near room temp and are forced out the flue by a fan. A
condensing 93% water heater wont loose 20% in flue loss since the fan
stopped some of the heat loss, but even the best condensing tank water
heater of 93% may only be 83% Energy Factor [I guess]. Condensing tank
water heaters are really commercial units costing thousands. AO Smith
has them, I own one a 175000 btu unit, a Cyclone. For most, electrics
are and always will be more expensive to run unless you have a cheaper
Hydro Dam nearby, since for most oil- gas products generate
electricity. Someone stated 70% for electric, that is not true to you
for what you consume and pay, he was talking about transmission line
loss, for you electric tank is 100% efficient, but here electricity is
still 30% more than NG. If nobody in your neighboorhood has an
electric furnace then you can bet Ng is still cheaper per Btu. Now in
the last 6 months all petroleum products are going up fast, but
electric will follow in the long run.

Posted by CWatters on March 20, 2008, 4:27 am

> On Wed, 19 Mar 2008 04:32:02 -0700 (PDT), ransley wrote:
> So, I think the fact that all none of the heat energy that went into the
> electric coils goes up any flue - it's all absorbed by the water - is what
> makes the electric water heater 98% efficiency.

Correct.

> But, as someone stated, I suspect the power generation is about 70%
> efficiency,
>
so, the true efficiency of electric water heating must be
> vastly lower than 98% taking distribution into account.
>
> But, how can we account for that true efficiency?
>
> Donna

Average power generation isn't anything like 70% efficient. Typical
efficiency for a coal fired station is 30-40% with only the latest
generation achieving 60%+. Gas fired around 47% and nuclear around 38%. Then
another 5-6% is lost in transmission. The average depends on what mix your
country has but I can't see it being much above 40-50% overall by the time
it reaches your house.

This web site compares the cost of different fuel sources in the UK. It's
the only site I've seen that takes into account boiler efficiency. The key
figure is the middle one "Pence per kWh after boiler efficiency". The actual
boiler efficiency is in brackets...

http://www.nottenergy.com/energy-costs-comparison2

Note that electric heating is indeed 100% efficient but the cost of that
electricity makes it expensive to run.

Heat Pumps have efficiencies of over 100% and in the case of a ground source
heat pump (GSHP) around 350%. This more than compensates for the loss of
efficiency producing the electricity needed to power. Overall a GSHP is the
cheapest system to run (ignoring capital costs). It would be interesting to
know if anyone makes a small scale gas or oil powered GSHP and how the
efficiency of those compare.

In theory it would _just_ be possible to use the heat from a GSHP to power a
Stirling engine to power the GSHP. This would not violate COE because there
is a heat source (the sun) providing power into the system. However most of
the heat produced by the GSHP would go into the stirling engine with very
little left over to heat your house. Stirling engines that big would also be
rather big physically. Overall such a system would be too big and expensive
to be practical - but it would be free to run.



Posted by CWatters on March 20, 2008, 4:29 am

>
> > On Wed, 19 Mar 2008 04:32:02 -0700 (PDT), ransley wrote:
> > So, I think the fact that all none of the heat energy that went into the
> > electric coils goes up any flue - it's all absorbed by the water - is
what
> > makes the electric water heater 98% efficiency.
>
> Correct.

Actually it's 100% efficient. I mean your reasoning is correct.



Page 4 of 9       < 1 2 3 > last >>
Similar ThreadsPosted
Hard water & choosing an indirect water heater June 11, 2007, 7:29 am
oil hot water heater CONVERSION for pool heater January 4, 2008, 8:03 pm
Here's how to PROVE high efficient boilers are not efficient? August 9, 2006, 10:11 am
non vented water heater December 13, 2006, 1:04 pm
Venting a gas hot water heater January 15, 2007, 7:26 pm
Venting a gas hot water heater January 15, 2007, 7:28 pm
New water heater questions. July 31, 2007, 2:51 am
New water heater questions. July 31, 2007, 3:31 am
New water heater questions. July 31, 2007, 3:33 am
tankless water heater, Hi everybody. December 21, 2007, 1:21 pm

Contact Us | Privacy Policy

XML SitemapXML Sitemap