Replacing a hot water heater. Efficiency?

I was, money in hand, ready to go tank-less, but am thinking better of
it. I think the savings projected depend on an ideal situation. I lack
that. If you have a situation where the runs to the taps or appliances
that use the hot water are short, it might be a savings. If you are
gone and the house is empty more than occupied, you might see some
savings. The consensus here seems to be that it would be worn out
before the pay off ever came and in the meantime you would have a noisy
expensive unit that few people know how to repair, and no reserve hot
water during a power outage.
My plan now is to put in recirculation loops on the units I have and
get instant hot water at the taps. That plan might use a tad more
energy to heat the water, but should eliminate a lot of wasted water,
which in my case has to be pumped.

http://www.askthebuilder.com/451_Tankless_Water_Heaters_-_Some_Surprising_Facts.shtml

talks about the overhyped tankless and their problems payback exceeds
the life of the tank..

Jay Pique wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I need to replace a hot water heater whose tank has cracked. Any
> recommendations? I'm leaning towards just a straight replacement, with
> a good energy rating. However, I've seen some articles on retrofit
> recirculating systems, as well as "on-demand" hot water, and would like
> to hear if anyone has any strong opinions. I'm willing to pay for an
> efficient system provided it breaks even cost-wise over say 5 years.
> Thanks.
> JP

Marathon.

Wilson wrote:
> Recirc wastes a lot of energy, unless the runs are thoroughly insulated.
> It's like running a little heat loop all the time!
> Efficiency wise, you're better off wasting the startup water each time.
> Wilson

The only time I've ever seen circulated hot water is in mid-rises where
you have really long runs of pipe -- say 10 floors -- that would never
get fully hot if you didn't recirculate.

> "Bob F" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > "Eric in North TX" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> >>
> >> I was, money in hand, ready to go tank-less, but am thinking better of
> >> it. I think the savings projected depend on an ideal situation. I lack
> >> that. If you have a situation where the runs to the taps or appliances
> >> that use the hot water are short, it might be a savings. If you are
> >> gone and the house is empty more than occupied, you might see some
> >> savings. The consensus here seems to be that it would be worn out
> >> before the pay off ever came and in the meantime you would have a noisy
> >> expensive unit that few people know how to repair, and no reserve hot
> >> water during a power outage.
> >> My plan now is to put in recirculation loops on the units I have and
> >> get instant hot water at the taps. That plan might use a tad more
> >> energy to heat the water, but should eliminate a lot of wasted water,
> >> which in my case has to be pumped.
> >
> > My plan when I put in the recirculation pump is to have a push button
> > near each water faucet. Push the button, the pump turns on for long enough
> > to get the hot water to all faucets on the loop. This will have no
> > additional
> > loss when no water is being used.
> >
> > Bob
> >
> >

HERE'S SOME PROS & CONS OF TANKLESS W/HEATERS:

http://www.chilipepperapp.com/tankless.htm

####################################################
James "Cubby" Culbertson wrote:
> "Jay Pique" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > Hello,
> >
> > I need to replace a hot water heater whose tank has cracked. Any
> > recommendations? I'm leaning towards just a straight replacement, with
> > a good energy rating. However, I've seen some articles on retrofit
> > recirculating systems, as well as "on-demand" hot water, and would like
> > to hear if anyone has any strong opinions. I'm willing to pay for an
> > efficient system provided it breaks even cost-wise over say 5 years.
> > Thanks.
> > JP
> >
>
> You may want to check out:
> http://www.waterheaterrescue.com/pages/WHRpages/English/Longevity/the-right-hot-water-heater.html
>
> Of course they're trying to sell their product, but it appears they offer
> some decent advice. I too am thinking I'll be replacing soon so found this
> website.
> Cheers,
> cc

here in buffalo ny: natural gas is cheaper fuel. we had 9 days no
electric after the freak october 13, 2006 22-inch wet snowstorm that
knocked 1/3 of a million people off the electrical power grid with
downed branches.
we had no interruption in hot water. [i once wished i bought the ebay
showerhead with a generator light in it.]
note here a 40,000 BTUH with standing pilot light gas water heater has
around a 61 gallon delivery in the first hour. note gas is usually
twice the recovery rate with gas at 40 gallons per hour and electric at
20 gallons per hour on the lower priced conventional household units.
and winter water to shower water temp is more than a 90 degree rise
requirement in this climate.
see various manufacturers websites but GRAINGER has excellent
comparison specifications information on their website:
http://www.grainger.com/Grainger/wwg/productIndex.shtml
also see extensive choosing and add-ons and troubleshooting of your
next water heater:
http://www.waterheaterrescue.com/pages/WHRpages/English/Troubleshooting/troubleshooting.html

Jay Pique wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I need to replace a hot water heater whose tank has cracked. Any
> recommendations? I'm leaning towards just a straight replacement, with
> a good energy rating. However, I've seen some articles on retrofit
> recirculating systems, as well as "on-demand" hot water, and would like
> to hear if anyone has any strong opinions. I'm willing to pay for an
> efficient system provided it breaks even cost-wise over say 5 years.
> Thanks.
> JP

note that in a cold weather area the heater is generally indoors, so
the standby losses help heat the home, thus they really arent lost
except in the summer

> I need to replace a hot water heater whose tank has cracked. Any
> recommendations? I'm leaning towards just a straight replacement,
> with a good energy rating. However, I've seen some articles on
> retrofit recirculating systems, as well as "on-demand" hot water, and
> would like to hear if anyone has any strong opinions. I'm willing to
> pay for an efficient system provided it breaks even cost-wise over
> say 5 years. Thanks.

I just built a new house 3 years ago and did the finish plumbing and
would like to comment on recirculation water. I had a 48' run from
the water heater to the shower on the other end of the house and
thought it would be wise to put a pump in a loop back to the water
heater. I also purchased a motion sensor switch that I put in the
bathroom to turn the pump on when the room was entered that also had a
manual switch on it so it could be turned off and the pump turned on
manually. These are available at Lowes. I insulated the supply and
return runs to the water heater. In the end I found the pump and my
switch set up were un-necessary since the water would re-circulate by
natural convection. I don't know what the situation would have been
if I would have wanted to do it to an upstairs floor. I would have had
to insulate the pipes going to upstairs walls before covering and so
on. My situation was water heater in basement and shower on the
opposite end of the house worked out fine.
Bill T

Bob F wrote:
> <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > note that in a cold weather area the heater is generally indoors, so
> > the standby losses help heat the home, thus they really arent lost
> > except in the summer
> >
>
> But if your gas furnace or heat pump produce the same heat for less
> $, you will pay more anyway. Or, heaven forbid, if you try to cool
> your house.
>
> Bob

ELECTRICITY is the MOST expensiv per BTU than any other heat source in
most of the country. primarlily because electricity is made frequently
by burning natural gas or other fuel sources, add a step in the process
adds costs

effcency of tank is printed on energy guide label along with average
costs to operate for compatison purposes. foam insulation is very good
today

Sounds inefficient to me.

Hot water doesn't need to be heated.

--

FF

"Jay Pique" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Hello,
>
> I need to replace a hot water heater whose tank has cracked. Any
> recommendations? I'm leaning towards just a straight replacement, with
> a good energy rating. However, I've seen some articles on retrofit
> recirculating systems, as well as "on-demand" hot water, and would like
> to hear if anyone has any strong opinions. I'm willing to pay for an
> efficient system provided it breaks even cost-wise over say 5 years.
> Thanks.
> JP
>

Electric? It makes no difference as electric is 100% efficient. Just buy a
good quality, standard 40- 50 gallon, or whatever fits your needs
Now with gas the different heaters are too numerous to mention, but if you
are looking for a 5 year payback, it ain't gonna happen! If it were me I
would just go with a good quality 40 or 50 gallon natural draft heater and
be done with it. It may not be the most efficient, but they are the most
trust worthy as repairs go. Any thing in a water heater that requires
electricity to run will most likely need repairs and there goes you payback!
Plus the price for efficiency goes up fast killing any idea of a quick
payback.
As far as I am concerned, you ether a pay a premium for the equipment, or
pay the utility, cost is about the same in the long run!
Greg

Al Bundy wrote:
> "Dave Bugg" <[email protected]> wrote in news:Mz1%g.1454$Dg6.502
> @newsfe07.lga:
>
>> Al Bundy wrote:
>>
>>> "Dave Bugg" <[email protected]> wrote in news:h7S_g.49$vT7.25
>>
>>>> electric power is about 1.2 cents per KW hour,
>>
>>> Huh?! Is that 1.2 or .12 ???
>>
>> 1 point 2 cents. Douglas County has the cheapest electrical rates in
>> the nation. Only a fool uses natural gas for appliances around here.
>>
>
>
> That's about as close to free as it can get. Just curious Dave, what
> is the primary reason?

Grand Coulee dam?

Sun, Oct 22, 2006, 3:09pm (EDT-3) [email protected] (Jay=A0Pique)
doth query here:
<snip> I've seen some articles on retrofit recirculating systems, as
well as "on-demand" hot water, <snip>

Dunno, got 'lectric myself, but my younger son does refrigeration,
and he says on-demand's the smart way to go, with gas, not electric.
I've used 'em oversea and was impressed, "very" nice to be able to have
hot water for as long as you want to shower. Those units were a little
larger than a lunch box.



JOAT
It's not hard, if you get your mind right.
- Granny Weatherwax

As an aside, I've seen people replace water heaters when they
stopped heating water, with the cause simply because the heating
element(s) quit. I've replaced my heating element 2-3 times over the
years, new heating element is about $10. Takes about an hour total,
you've got to drain the tank first, which needs a length of garden hose.
No biggie. It does call for a special wrench, which cost somewhere over
$5. Pus a screwdriver.



JOAT
It's not hard, if you get your mind right.
- Granny Weatherwax

"Jay Pique" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Hello,
>
> I need to replace a hot water heater whose tank has cracked. Any
> recommendations? I'm leaning towards just a straight replacement, with
> a good energy rating. However, I've seen some articles on retrofit
> recirculating systems, as well as "on-demand" hot water, and would like
> to hear if anyone has any strong opinions. I'm willing to pay for an
> efficient system provided it breaks even cost-wise over say 5 years.
> Thanks.
> JP
>

You may want to check out:
http://www.waterheaterrescue.com/pages/WHRpages/English/Longevity/the-right-hot-water-heater.html

Of course they're trying to sell their product, but it appears they offer
some decent advice. I too am thinking I'll be replacing soon so found this
website.
Cheers,
cc

"[email protected]" wrote:

> http://www.askthebuilder.com/451_Tankless_Water_Heaters_-_Some_Surprising_Facts.shtml
>
> talks about the overhyped tankless and their problems payback exceeds
> the life of the tank..

Did you see the date of a reply puts that pre-03. Back in 03 I would go with tankless
because they were reletively new but today's units have a lot more going for them.
Research the latest, I did and we are using a propane tankless from Bosch.

"J T" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
Sun, Oct 22, 2006, 3:09pm (EDT-3) [email protected] (Jay Pique)
doth query here:
<snip> I've seen some articles on retrofit recirculating systems, as
well as "on-demand" hot water, <snip>

Dunno, got 'lectric myself, but my younger son does refrigeration,
and he says on-demand's the smart way to go, with gas, not electric.
I've used 'em oversea and was impressed, "very" nice to be able to have
hot water for as long as you want to shower. Those units were a little
larger than a lunch box.

I did not see the original post, it must have been x-posted and got snipped.
But I've read that you don't really save any (many) dollars with the
On-Demand, as the lost heat from the tank ends up heating the house anyway.
Not such a good thing in the summer I suppose. But I HATE the lack of hot
water in the mornings. So in 30 years when the tank dies, I definitely won't
care.

Bob F wrote:
> "George E. Cawthon" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Bob F wrote:
>>> "Greg O" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>> Electric? It makes no difference as electric is 100% efficient. Just
> buy a
>>>> good quality, standard 40- 50 gallon, or whatever fits your needs
>>> Electric has losses also - depending on the insulation level of the
> tank.
>>> 100%
>>> efficient? Only if you are heating the area with electric heat all the
> time.
>>> Bob
>>>
>>>
>> It is 100 percent because the efficiency rating is
>> based on the conversion of the heat potential of
>> the fuel to the heat potential of the water. Loss
>> of heat because of poor insulation of the tank
>> etc. is not part of the "efficiency" rating. And
>> it has to be that way because no one can predict
>> or account for all the possible combinations of
>> installation including outside (no protection),
>> cold garage, small closet, etc. If efficiency did
>> include other factors, gas water heaters would
>> have a terrible efficiency (just think of that
>> hole through the center of tank and the air heated
>> by the hot water rising through the flue pipe to
>> the outdoors.
>>
>
> Who cares about "ratings"? The fact is that some water heaters
> are better insulated, and will cost you less to operate. They
> lesser insulated ones are less "efficient". 100%? I don't think so.
> Sure, they convert 100% of the energy to heat in the water. But
> then they lose the heat to the environment. IF you use a cheaper
> source of heat to heat your house, or if you want to cool it, that
> is going to cost you money.
>
> Bob
>
>
Whoa, I just reread that for the 3rd time.

"J T" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> As an aside, I've seen people replace water heaters when they
> stopped heating water, with the cause simply because the heating
> element(s) quit. I've replaced my heating element 2-3 times over the
> years, new heating element is about $10. Takes about an hour total,
> you've got to drain the tank first, which needs a length of garden hose.
> No biggie. It does call for a special wrench, which cost somewhere over
> $5. Pus a screwdriver.


Don't leave out the possibility of the thermostat also. That part is
relatively inexpensicd and easy to change out also. If you have hard
water/lots of sediment in your water, draining the tank yearly can extend
the life of the bottom element and increase the efficacy of the water
heater.

I hope you guys talking about hot water heaters don't jinx me. I'm home
right now having a furnace replaced. I have no idea how old the water heater
is. I had an on demand water heater when I was in Japan. I hope that they
have gotten better. The best that one would do is give you a luke warm
shower. The slower you had the water running, the warmer it would get (more
time in the heater). Problem was, if you turned it down to low, the flame
would go out but a small amount of gas would continue to flow. This would
continue until the gas cloud got to the pilot light and then it would ignite
with a ball of flame and sound like a bomb, violently shaking the bathroom
wall. Never even considered one of those after that.

"Bill Stock" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I did not see the original post, it must have been x-posted and got
snipped.
> But I've read that you don't really save any (many) dollars with the
> On-Demand, as the lost heat from the tank ends up heating the house
anyway.
> Not such a good thing in the summer I suppose. But I HATE the lack of hot
> water in the mornings. So in 30 years when the tank dies, I definitely
won't
> care.
>
>
>

"Eric in North TX" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> I was, money in hand, ready to go tank-less, but am thinking better of
> it. I think the savings projected depend on an ideal situation. I lack
> that. If you have a situation where the runs to the taps or appliances
> that use the hot water are short, it might be a savings. If you are
> gone and the house is empty more than occupied, you might see some
> savings. The consensus here seems to be that it would be worn out
> before the pay off ever came and in the meantime you would have a noisy
> expensive unit that few people know how to repair, and no reserve hot
> water during a power outage.
> My plan now is to put in recirculation loops on the units I have and
> get instant hot water at the taps. That plan might use a tad more
> energy to heat the water, but should eliminate a lot of wasted water,
> which in my case has to be pumped.

My plan when I put in the recirculation pump is to have a push button
near each water faucet. Push the button, the pump turns on for long enough
to get the hot water to all faucets on the loop. This will have no
additional
loss when no water is being used.

Bob

George E. Cawthon wrote:

> Dave Bugg wrote:
>
>> 1 point 2 cents. Douglas County has the cheapest electrical rates in
>> the nation. Only a fool uses natural gas for appliances around here.

> I suggest you check at:
> http://www.douglaselectric.com/billestimator.php
>
> and tell us what the cost per kWh is.

Huh? Douglas Electric has nothing to do with Douglas County, WA. It ain't
our electricity provider.

--
Dave
www.davebbq.com

Al Bundy wrote:

> "Dave Bugg" <[email protected]> wrote in news:h7S_g.49$vT7.25

>> electric power is about 1.2 cents per KW hour,

> Huh?! Is that 1.2 or .12 ???

1 point 2 cents. Douglas County has the cheapest electrical rates in the
nation. Only a fool uses natural gas for appliances around here.

--
Dave
www.davebbq.com

Dave Bugg wrote:
> George E. Cawthon wrote:
>
>> Dave Bugg wrote:
>>
>>> 1 point 2 cents. Douglas County has the cheapest electrical rates in
>>> the nation. Only a fool uses natural gas for appliances around here.
>
>> I suggest you check at:
>> http://www.douglaselectric.com/billestimator.php
>>
>> and tell us what the cost per kWh is.
>
> Huh? Douglas Electric has nothing to do with Douglas County, WA. It ain't
> our electricity provider.
>

Sorry about that. Forgot that Oregon had a
Douglas County.

I see that Douglas County PUD (your electric
provider) signed a recent agreement to provide
electricity for an industrial contract at 1.8
cents per kWh. Industrial power usually sells at
way below residential rates.

[email protected] (J T) writes:
> As an aside, I've seen people replace water heaters when they
>stopped heating water, with the cause simply because the heating
>element(s) quit. I've replaced my heating element 2-3 times over the
>years, new heating element is about $10. Takes about an hour total,
>you've got to drain the tank first, which needs a length of garden hose.
>No biggie. It does call for a special wrench, which cost somewhere over
>$5. Pus a screwdriver.

Or the thermocouple for the pilot cracks. An easy USD7 repair.

scott

<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> note that in a cold weather area the heater is generally indoors, so
> the standby losses help heat the home, thus they really arent lost
> except in the summer
>

But if your gas furnace or heat pump produce the same heat for less
$, you will pay more anyway. Or, heaven forbid, if you try to cool
your house.

Bob

"Jay Pique" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Hello,
>
> I need to replace a hot water heater whose tank has cracked. Any
> recommendations? I'm leaning towards just a straight replacement, with
> a good energy rating. However, I've seen some articles on retrofit
> recirculating systems, as well as "on-demand" hot water, and would like
> to hear if anyone has any strong opinions. I'm willing to pay for an
> efficient system provided it breaks even cost-wise over say 5 years.
> Thanks.
> JP
>

I replaced mine 2 years ago with a top of the line electric Whirlpool from
Lowe's. Since I pay about 14 cents per kilowatt hour I have been monitoring
my electricity usage for 15 plus years. I paid about $325 for the water
heater and know for certain that it has paid for itself in energy savings
already.

"Dave Bugg" <[email protected]> wrote in news:h7S_g.49$vT7.25
@newsfe03.lga:

> Jay Pique wrote:
>
>> I need to replace a hot water heater whose tank has cracked. Any
>> recommendations? I'm leaning towards just a straight replacement,
>> with a good energy rating. However, I've seen some articles on
>> retrofit recirculating systems, as well as "on-demand" hot water, and
>> would like to hear if anyone has any strong opinions. I'm willing to
>> pay for an efficient system provided it breaks even cost-wise over
>> say 5 years. Thanks.
>
> Gas or electric? Size of the family? Here in Douglas County, WA., where
> electric power is about 1.2 cents per KW hour, I would do a straight
> replacement in my household with the most efficient 60 gallon electric
> heater I could find.


> electric power is about 1.2 cents per KW hour,


Huh?! Is that 1.2 or .12 ???

"Dave Bugg" <[email protected]> wrote in news:Mz1%g.1454$Dg6.502
@newsfe07.lga:

> Al Bundy wrote:
>
>> "Dave Bugg" <[email protected]> wrote in news:h7S_g.49$vT7.25
>
>>> electric power is about 1.2 cents per KW hour,
>
>> Huh?! Is that 1.2 or .12 ???
>
> 1 point 2 cents. Douglas County has the cheapest electrical rates in the
> nation. Only a fool uses natural gas for appliances around here.
>


That's about as close to free as it can get. Just curious Dave, what is the
primary reason?

"Dave Bugg" <[email protected]> wrote in
news:JAd%[email protected]:

> George E. Cawthon wrote:
>
>> Dave Bugg wrote:
>>
>>> 1 point 2 cents. Douglas County has the cheapest electrical rates in
>>> the nation. Only a fool uses natural gas for appliances around here.
>
>> I suggest you check at:
>> http://www.douglaselectric.com/billestimator.php
>>
>> and tell us what the cost per kWh is.
>
> Huh? Douglas Electric has nothing to do with Douglas County, WA. It
> ain't our electricity provider.
>


It's one of the PUD's right?

Bob F wrote:
> "Greg O" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> Electric? It makes no difference as electric is 100% efficient. Just buy a
>> good quality, standard 40- 50 gallon, or whatever fits your needs
>
> Electric has losses also - depending on the insulation level of the tank.
> 100%
> efficient? Only if you are heating the area with electric heat all the time.
>
> Bob
>
>
It is 100 percent because the efficiency rating is
based on the conversion of the heat potential of
the fuel to the heat potential of the water. Loss
of heat because of poor insulation of the tank
etc. is not part of the "efficiency" rating. And
it has to be that way because no one can predict
or account for all the possible combinations of
installation including outside (no protection),
cold garage, small closet, etc. If efficiency did
include other factors, gas water heaters would
have a terrible efficiency (just think of that
hole through the center of tank and the air heated
by the hot water rising through the flue pipe to
the outdoors.

Did you actually TRY to read what I wrote?

Bob

"Wilson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Recirc wastes a lot of energy, unless the runs are thoroughly insulated.
> It's like running a little heat loop all the time!
> Efficiency wise, you're better off wasting the startup water each time.
> Wilson
> "Bob F" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > "Eric in North TX" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> >>
> >> I was, money in hand, ready to go tank-less, but am thinking better of
> >> it. I think the savings projected depend on an ideal situation. I lack
> >> that. If you have a situation where the runs to the taps or appliances
> >> that use the hot water are short, it might be a savings. If you are
> >> gone and the house is empty more than occupied, you might see some
> >> savings. The consensus here seems to be that it would be worn out
> >> before the pay off ever came and in the meantime you would have a noisy
> >> expensive unit that few people know how to repair, and no reserve hot
> >> water during a power outage.
> >> My plan now is to put in recirculation loops on the units I have and
> >> get instant hot water at the taps. That plan might use a tad more
> >> energy to heat the water, but should eliminate a lot of wasted water,
> >> which in my case has to be pumped.
> >
> > My plan when I put in the recirculation pump is to have a push button
> > near each water faucet. Push the button, the pump turns on for long
enough
> > to get the hot water to all faucets on the loop. This will have no
> > additional
> > loss when no water is being used.
> >
> > Bob
> >
> >
>
>

"Greg O" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Jay Pique" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Hello,
>>
>> I need to replace a hot water heater whose tank has cracked. Any
>> recommendations? I'm leaning towards just a straight replacement, with
>> a good energy rating. However, I've seen some articles on retrofit
>> recirculating systems, as well as "on-demand" hot water, and would like
>> to hear if anyone has any strong opinions. I'm willing to pay for an
>> efficient system provided it breaks even cost-wise over say 5 years.
>> Thanks.
>> JP
>>
>
> Electric? It makes no difference as electric is 100% efficient.

It is 100% efficient in turning electricity into heat. It is not 100%
efficient in transferring that heat to the water nor is it 100% efficient in
turning fuel into heat. It just moves the point of inefficiency from a
local burner to a generating plant.

> Just buy a good quality, standard 40- 50 gallon, or whatever fits your
> needs
> Now with gas the different heaters are too numerous to mention, but if you
> are looking for a 5 year payback, it ain't gonna happen! If it were me I
> would just go with a good quality 40 or 50 gallon natural draft heater and
> be done with it. It may not be the most efficient, but they are the most
> trust worthy as repairs go. Any thing in a water heater that requires
> electricity to run will most likely need repairs and there goes you
> payback! Plus the price for efficiency goes up fast killing any idea of a
> quick payback.
> As far as I am concerned, you ether a pay a premium for the equipment, or
> pay the utility, cost is about the same in the long run!
> Greg
>
>
>

Bob F <[email protected]> wrote:

>My plan when I put in the recirculation pump is to have a push button
>near each water faucet. Push the button, the pump turns on for long enough
>to get the hot water to all faucets on the loop...

A $15 motion detector might be more convenient.

Nick

Bill Stock wrote:

>
> I did not see the original post, it must have been x-posted and got snipped.
> But I've read that you don't really save any (many) dollars with the
> On-Demand, as the lost heat from the tank ends up heating the house anyway.
> Not such a good thing in the summer I suppose. But I HATE the lack of hot
> water in the mornings. So in 30 years when the tank dies, I definitely won't
> care.
>

From what I've read the "pay back" on the on-demand heaters is about 25
years which usually exceeds the life of the heater. The only way I'd
buy one is if my hot water usage required the instant recovery.

--
Jack Novak
Buffalo, NY - USA
[email protected]

Jay Pique wrote:

> I need to replace a hot water heater whose tank has cracked. Any
> recommendations? I'm leaning towards just a straight replacement,
> with a good energy rating. However, I've seen some articles on
> retrofit recirculating systems, as well as "on-demand" hot water, and
> would like to hear if anyone has any strong opinions. I'm willing to
> pay for an efficient system provided it breaks even cost-wise over
> say 5 years. Thanks.

Gas or electric? Size of the family? Here in Douglas County, WA., where
electric power is about 1.2 cents per KW hour, I would do a straight
replacement in my household with the most efficient 60 gallon electric
heater I could find.
--
Dave
www.davebbq.com

Dave Bugg wrote:
> Al Bundy wrote:
>
>> "Dave Bugg" <[email protected]> wrote in news:h7S_g.49$vT7.25
>
>>> electric power is about 1.2 cents per KW hour,
>
>> Huh?! Is that 1.2 or .12 ???
>
> 1 point 2 cents. Douglas County has the cheapest electrical rates in the
> nation. Only a fool uses natural gas for appliances around here.
>

I suggest you check at:
http://www.douglaselectric.com/billestimator.php

and tell us what the cost per kWh is.

"George E. Cawthon" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Bob F wrote:
> > "Greg O" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> Electric? It makes no difference as electric is 100% efficient. Just
buy a
> >> good quality, standard 40- 50 gallon, or whatever fits your needs
> >
> > Electric has losses also - depending on the insulation level of the
tank.
> > 100%
> > efficient? Only if you are heating the area with electric heat all the
time.
> >
> > Bob
> >
> >
> It is 100 percent because the efficiency rating is
> based on the conversion of the heat potential of
> the fuel to the heat potential of the water. Loss
> of heat because of poor insulation of the tank
> etc. is not part of the "efficiency" rating. And
> it has to be that way because no one can predict
> or account for all the possible combinations of
> installation including outside (no protection),
> cold garage, small closet, etc. If efficiency did
> include other factors, gas water heaters would
> have a terrible efficiency (just think of that
> hole through the center of tank and the air heated
> by the hot water rising through the flue pipe to
> the outdoors.
>

Who cares about "ratings"? The fact is that some water heaters
are better insulated, and will cost you less to operate. They
lesser insulated ones are less "efficient". 100%? I don't think so.
Sure, they convert 100% of the energy to heat in the water. But
then they lose the heat to the environment. IF you use a cheaper
source of heat to heat your house, or if you want to cool it, that
is going to cost you money.

Bob

"Dave Bugg" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:Mz1%[email protected]...
> Al Bundy wrote:
>
>> "Dave Bugg" <[email protected]> wrote in news:h7S_g.49$vT7.25
>
>>> electric power is about 1.2 cents per KW hour,
>
>> Huh?! Is that 1.2 or .12 ???
>
> 1 point 2 cents. Douglas County has the cheapest electrical rates in the
> nation. Only a fool uses natural gas for appliances around here.
>
> --
> Dave
> www.davebbq.com
>
>
>


OK, where is Douglas County???? In Houston after deregulation we enjoy
about 14 cents per kilowatt hour if you switch often to the cheaper
provider. 10 years ago I averaged 5 cents per kilowatt hour.

I suppose there is always a first......a wooden hot water heater. Wonder
what type of wood?? IPE?? Problem wood (pun) be is the heat and the water. I
think 20-30 coats of poly might work. Stain??
Gas would not be my first choice.
"Jay Pique" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Hello,
>
> I need to replace a hot water heater whose tank has cracked. Any
> recommendations? I'm leaning towards just a straight replacement, with
> a good energy rating. However, I've seen some articles on retrofit
> recirculating systems, as well as "on-demand" hot water, and would like
> to hear if anyone has any strong opinions. I'm willing to pay for an
> efficient system provided it breaks even cost-wise over say 5 years.
> Thanks.
> JP
>

On Mon, 23 Oct 2006 11:33:38 -0400, [email protected] (J T)
wrote:

> As an aside, I've seen people replace water heaters when they
>stopped heating water, with the cause simply because the heating
>element(s) quit. I've replaced my heating element 2-3 times over the
>years, new heating element is about $10. Takes about an hour total,
>you've got to drain the tank first, which needs a length of garden hose.
>No biggie. It does call for a special wrench, which cost somewhere over
>$5. Pus a screwdriver.

I'm sure it's easy enough, but it brings to mind a funny story. When
we first bought the house, I figured I'd turn the water heater down a
little to save some electricity. The wife had been crowing about how
she had worked for an HVAC place at some point, and she knew all about
them. So I had her double-check me before I made the adjustment to
make sure I was doing the right thing with it. She took the
screwdriver out of my hands and started poking inside the case with
it- after about 1 second of that, she got a nice jolt of 220. Guess
she didn't know as much about it as she said she did...

Yes, the adjustment got made- by me. She's no longer allowed to *fix*
any of the major appliances (or paint, but that's another story.)

Recirc wastes a lot of energy, unless the runs are thoroughly insulated.
It's like running a little heat loop all the time!
Efficiency wise, you're better off wasting the startup water each time.
Wilson
"Bob F" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Eric in North TX" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> I was, money in hand, ready to go tank-less, but am thinking better of
>> it. I think the savings projected depend on an ideal situation. I lack
>> that. If you have a situation where the runs to the taps or appliances
>> that use the hot water are short, it might be a savings. If you are
>> gone and the house is empty more than occupied, you might see some
>> savings. The consensus here seems to be that it would be worn out
>> before the pay off ever came and in the meantime you would have a noisy
>> expensive unit that few people know how to repair, and no reserve hot
>> water during a power outage.
>> My plan now is to put in recirculation loops on the units I have and
>> get instant hot water at the taps. That plan might use a tad more
>> energy to heat the water, but should eliminate a lot of wasted water,
>> which in my case has to be pumped.
>
> My plan when I put in the recirculation pump is to have a push button
> near each water faucet. Push the button, the pump turns on for long enough
> to get the hot water to all faucets on the loop. This will have no
> additional
> loss when no water is being used.
>
> Bob
>
>

Somebody wrote:

> Electric? It makes no difference as electric is 100% efficient.

Nothing is 100% efficient.

Electric still may be a good choice, IF you do the following:

1) Must have an off peak heating rate to make it economically feasible.

2) Off peak heating means you need a large tank, at least 80-100
gallons for a family of 4.

Remember, you will be heating water at 2:00AM for a hot shower at
6:00PM that night.

My father built a house and followed the above guidelines.

We always had hot water during the 10 years I lived there, before
leaving home.

Lew

Jay Pique wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I need to replace a hot water heater whose tank has cracked. Any
> recommendations? I'm leaning towards just a straight replacement, with
> a good energy rating. However, I've seen some articles on retrofit
> recirculating systems, as well as "on-demand" hot water, and would like
> to hear if anyone has any strong opinions. I'm willing to pay for an
> efficient system provided it breaks even cost-wise over say 5 years.
> Thanks.
> JP
>
> From - Sun

See:

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/home-garden/heating-cooling-air/waterheater-tips-205-gas-hot-water-heater-electric-hot-water-heater/overview/index.htm

--
Jack Novak
Buffalo, NY - USA
[email protected]

"Greg O" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> Electric? It makes no difference as electric is 100% efficient. Just buy a
> good quality, standard 40- 50 gallon, or whatever fits your needs

Electric has losses also - depending on the insulation level of the tank.
100%
efficient? Only if you are heating the area with electric heat all the time.

Bob