Toshiba TV29C90 problem; Image fades to black...

[James Sweet]

"Donna Ohl, Grady Volunteer Coordinator" <donna.ohl@sbcglobal.net> wrote in
message news:r7Prj.9814$Ch6.4124@newssvr11.news.prodigy.net...

On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 02:26:24 -0000, Gary Heston wrote:
That's mainly a function of BTUs, so the second of the two above will
be slightly better; of course, it'll burn a bit more gas. If that's a
concern, go with the first.

I'm still looking up ways to make a smart decision.
One thing I've noticed is that the efficiency factors I've been quoted
from
Home Depot stink (basically 58 to 59 percent).

I called PG&E and they pointed me to a $30 rebate but only for residential
gas water heaters of an EF of 62% or greater.
http://www.pge.com/res/rebates/gas_electric_storage/

Does anyone know where to find a 40gallon or 50gallon hot water heater
with
that efficiency rating at a major chain (sears or home depot or ???).
http://www.pge.com/res/rebates/

Donna

Call around and ask, there's only a few different companies that make these
things, others just stick their name on them. As far as I know, the
efficiency of gas water heaters doesn't vary much from one to the next
unless you go tankless.

 

[HeyBub]

Donna Ohl, Grady Volunteer Coordinator wrote:

I've since given up on tankless for the retrofit costs. The labor at
Home Depot seems to be $309 to hook up the new hot water heater and
haul away the old one; plus $55 for earthquake straps; plus $50 for
permits; plus taxes of roughly 9% on the parts and service.

Earthquake straps? In the Bronx? What a rip-off. I haven't been able to find
an earthquake in that area larger than a 2.6 (roughly equivalent to closing
a drawer). You have to get to 4.0 before there's any damage that's even
noticable. (The WTC collapse registered 2.3.)

$50 permit? Call city hall and see if a permit is required.

As for charging you to haul the old one off, forget it. Just put the defunct
heater on the curb and the urban faries will scoop it up during the night
(they sell them to scrap metal places or make hinges for the doors on their
little Leprechaun houses, I forget which.).

Bite the bullet and take your lumps, the joys of being a home owner.
Here are the comparisons I can generate so far, based on what Home
Depot says at their Bronx New York Water Heater Servicing Center.

The prices below are installed but sans earthquake straps, permits, &
taxes. Note that the Home Depot water heater servicing center had no
figures for the BTUs (they said they weren't important). They mostly
pushed warranty but I did my comparison by cost per First Hour Rating.

Home Depot Water Heater Servicing Center (877-467-0542)
by price (installed), SKU, FHR, EF, BTU, volume, and warranty:
$608 SG40T12AVH/182-755 72galFHR 0.59EF ??KBTU 40gal 6-yr(drain
2x/year) $658 SG50T12AVH/183-717 80galFHR 0.58EF ??KBTU 50gal
6-yr(drain 2x/year) $677 SG40T12AVH/182-786 72galFHR 0.59EF ??KBTU
40gal 9-yr(self cleaning) $718 SG50T12AVH/184-076 80galFHR 0.58EF
??KBTU 50gal 9-yr(self cleaning) $728 SG40T12AVH/182-953 68galFHR
0.59EF ??KBTU 40gal 12-yr(self cleaning) $783 SG50T12AVH/185-191
83galFHR 0.58EF ??KBTU 50gal 12-yr(self cleaning)

Here are the best numbers I could find by going to the local Home
Depot. Notice the only way to get the all-important First Hour Rating
was to open each and every box which the floorperson balked at so I
don't know that or the Energy Factor.

Here is what was at the store by price, UPC, FHR, ER, BTU, volume, &
warranty:
$280, 514017, ??gal FHR, .??EF, 34K, 40gal, 3yr
$290, 509501, ??gal FHR, .??EF, 36K, 40gal, 6yr
$350, 519005, ??gal FHR, .??EF, 38K, 40gal, 9yr
$350, 431048, ??gal FHR, .??EF, 38K, 50gal, 6yr
$360, 494272, ??gal FHR, .??EF, 40K, 40gal, 6yr
$370, 551821, ??gal FHR, .??EF, 40K, 40gal, 9yr
$380, 569840, ??gal FHR, .??EF, 34K, 40gal, 6yr
$410, 431055, ??gal FHR, .??EF, 38K, 50gal, 9yr
$420, 518411, ??gal FHR, .59EF, 40K, 40gal, 12yr
$420, 494302, 68gal FHR, .??EF, 40K, 50gal, 6yr
$440, 518435, ??gal FHR, .??EF, 40K, 50gal, 12yr

Do any of these choices seem most reasonable to replace my existing 65
gallon First Hour Rating, ??EF, 40 gallon, 35,000 BTU 50" tall by 18"
diameter gas-fired shelf-mounted earthquake-strapped hot water heater?

Donna

 

[Nate Nagel]

Donna Ohl, Grady Volunteer Coordinator wrote:

On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 02:26:24 -0000, Gary Heston wrote:

That's mainly a function of BTUs, so the second of the two above will
be slightly better; of course, it'll burn a bit more gas. If that's a
concern, go with the first.


I'm still looking up ways to make a smart decision.
One thing I've noticed is that the efficiency factors I've been quoted from
Home Depot stink (basically 58 to 59 percent).

I called PG&E and they pointed me to a $30 rebate but only for residential
gas water heaters of an EF of 62% or greater.
http://www.pge.com/res/rebates/gas_electric_storage/

Does anyone know where to find a 40gallon or 50gallon hot water heater with
that efficiency rating at a major chain (sears or home depot or ???).
http://www.pge.com/res/rebates/

Donna

Rheem should have a few models that qualify, and they're a pretty common
brand. Also see if any State or Craftmaster models meet your needs;
AFAICT those three make up the vast majority of the water heater market;
many other brands are just relabels of those three. There's another one
that you can't buy direct (only sold to pros) but I can't recall the
name now.

BTW, you're getting all obsessive compulsive about this. I like you

nate

--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel

 

30,000 what, yen ? That's about two dollars isn't it ?

JURB

 

[Donna Ohl, Grady Voluntee]

On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 22:32:43 -0500, Nate Nagel wrote:
Hi Nate and others,
I appreciate the help.
One thing that confuses me to no end is this EFFICIENCY thing.

If both a 50 gallon and 40 gallon water heater has the same 59 percent
efficiency factor ... do they cost the SAME to heat?

Or does the 50 gallon water heater actually cost more even if it's the same
efficiency?

The reason I ask is I assumed they cost the same to operate but someone
said the smaller water heater will cost less to operate even if the
efficiency factor is the same.

Can someone who understands this clarify if a larger heater truly costs
more to operate than a smaller volume heater even if the efficiency factor
is the same?

Donna

 

[Donna Ohl, Grady Voluntee]

On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 03:28:11 GMT, James Sweet wrote:
On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 03:28:11 GMT, James Sweet wrote:

The only number that really matters to you is the capacity

Hi James,
I don't wish to argue and I certainly appreciate any help but I think
that's bad advice based on what I read.

For example, look here:
http://www.candcheat.com/webapp/GetPage?pid=149

Where it says:
Although many consumers make water heater purchase decisions based only on
the size of the storage tank, the first-hour rating (FHR), provided on the
Energy Guide label, is actually more important. The FHR is a measure of how
much hot water the heater will deliver during a busy hour. The FHR is
required by law to appear on the unit's Energy Guide label. Therefore,
before you buy a water heater, estimate your household's peak-hour demand
and look for a unit with an FHR in that range. And beware that a larger
tank doesn't necessarily mean a higher FHR.

The point is that the volume of the water heater is, apparently,
meaningless from a standpoint of delivering enough hot water to meet our
needs. The volume is merely (apparently) a starting point - just like the
warranty is as meaningless as the volume.

So, it seems, based on my research, that to buy by volume and warranty are
exactly what the manufacturers want you to do to keep you as far away from
meaningful critera as possible.

What's really important, it seems, is the FHR and the EF. The only thing
I'm really confused about is whether two equal efficiency (to simplify the
argument) hot water heaters of two different sizes cost the same or
different amounts.

Do you know?

Donna

 

[Donna Ohl, Grady Voluntee]

On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 23:10:47 -0500, mc wrote:

Or does the 50 gallon water heater actually cost more
even if it's the same efficiency factor?

Heating less water costs less, even with equally efficient heaters.

Are you sure?

Look at what this energy page says about the Efficiency Factor:
http://www.friendlyplumber.com/plumbing101/washer_heater_energy.html

The "energy factor [is the] number of cycles that can be completed w/ one
kilowatt-hour of electricity".

If that's true, then it's independent of the VOLUME of the water heater.

So, if I read that correctly, a 40-gallon water heater with an EF of .58
takes roughly about 2 KWH of power to heat once while a 50-gallon water
heater with the same EF would take EXACTLY the same amount of power to heat
all 50 gallons.

Can someone check my math on that web page and report back if I understand
incorrectly? If we turn off our brains, of course 40 gallons would cost
less to heat than 50 gallons; but if we think, it might not be so.

Can you help me think about this properly?
What does the Efficiency Factor say about costs for two different sized
tanks with the same efficiency factor?

Donna

 

[Donna Ohl, Grady Voluntee]

On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 21:20:35 -0700, Rick Blaine wrote:

Hint: Direct energy cost is based on _use_ and efficiency, not _capacity_ and
efficiency.

Good point ... dead capacity vs active usage!

Darn. I wish I understood this EF thing better, especially given two
identical situations where the *only* difference is the CAPACITY.

Based on what you implied, if I inferred correctly, if the USAGE was
exactly the same for two water heaters with the same EF, then the costs to
operate a 50-gallon water heater would be EXACTLY the same as the costs to
operate a 100-gallon water heater (if the Efficiency Factor were the same
for both).

Did I understand the math (and your point) correctly?

Donna

 

[Donna Ohl, Grady Voluntee]

On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 04:23:57 GMT, Malcolm Hoar wrote:

The tank is "leaking" heat 24 hours per day, 7 days a week.
A well insulated tank will store the energy you used and
paid for. A poorly insulated tank will throw it away.

Another good point.

Does the Efficiency Factor take this heat leakage into account?
Or is the ONLY way to research the insulation thickness (which doesn't seem
to be on the energy star label).

What's the easiest way to compare heat leakage between two water heaters?

Donna

 

Back around 1980 or 1981, I replaced my old gas water heater with a new
30 gallon electric water heater.I installed the new water heater
myself.It is still working as good as new.
cuhulin

 

[mc]

"Donna Ohl, Grady Volunteer Coordinator" <donna.ohl@sbcglobal.net> wrote in
message news:0GPrj.11942$hI1.2983@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com...

On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 22:32:43 -0500, Nate Nagel wrote:
Hi Nate and others,
I appreciate the help.
One thing that confuses me to no end is this EFFICIENCY thing.

If both a 50 gallon and 40 gallon water heater has the same 59 percent
efficiency factor ... do they cost the SAME to heat?

Or does the 50 gallon water heater actually cost more even if it's the
same
efficiency?

Heating less water costs less, even with equally efficient heaters.

 

[Malcolm Hoar]

In article <0GPrj.11942$hI1.2983@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com>, "Donna Ohl, Grady Volunteer Coordinator" <donna.ohl@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 22:32:43 -0500, Nate Nagel wrote:
Hi Nate and others,
I appreciate the help.
One thing that confuses me to no end is this EFFICIENCY thing.

If both a 50 gallon and 40 gallon water heater has the same 59 percent
efficiency factor ... do they cost the SAME to heat?

Nope.

Or does the 50 gallon water heater actually cost more even if it's the same
efficiency?

Yup.

The reason I ask is I assumed they cost the same to operate but someone
said the smaller water heater will cost less to operate even if the
efficiency factor is the same.

The smaller heater will be cheaper to run -- but it may not
provide enough hot water when you need it.

But the difference (between 40 and 50 gal) isn't going to be
that great provided the heater has good insulation.

The energy factor tells you how well much of the gas is
converted into hot water. A low rating on a gas heater
means lots of therms (energy) are going up the flue.

Can someone who understands this clarify if a larger heater truly costs
more to operate than a smaller volume heater even if the efficiency factor
is the same?

If your current heater is 40gal and meets your demands, I
see absolutely no reason to upgrade to a 50gal tank.

I'm in Northern CA and a 50 gal tank is just about adequate
for my home -- with 2500 sq ft, two adults and three kids.
We run a little low on hot water if everyone takes a shower
or bath in really quick succession while doing laundry.
It's a very minor problem about once a year. 99% of the
time, 50 gals is just fine.


--
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
| Malcolm Hoar "The more I practice, the luckier I get". |
| malch@malch.com Gary Player. |
| http://www.malch.com/ Shpx gur PQN. |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

[Rick Blaine]

"Donna Ohl, Grady Volunteer Coordinator" <donna.ohl@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

One thing that confuses me to no end is this EFFICIENCY thing.

If both a 50 gallon and 40 gallon water heater has the same 59 percent
efficiency factor ... do they cost the SAME to heat?

For the same water use, yes. Efficiency refers to non-electric heaters
(electrics are 100% efficient), and accounts for the heat loss up the vent pipe.
In other words, heat that doesn't heat the water.

Or does the 50 gallon water heater actually cost more even if it's the same
efficiency?

Not to heat the water, but over the lifetime, yes.

The reason I ask is I assumed they cost the same to operate but someone
said the smaller water heater will cost less to operate even if the
efficiency factor is the same.

True.

Can someone who understands this clarify if a larger heater truly costs
more to operate than a smaller volume heater even if the efficiency factor
is the same?

Although both units will use the same amount of energy to heat water, the larger
heater has a larger tank, which in turn means it has more surface exposed to the
outside. The greater the surface area, the greater the heat loss when you aren't
using water, which means the larger heater will use more energy to maintain the
hot water.

Now, if you live north of the Mason Dixon line and your water heater is inside
the house, then that isn't a total loss as you heat that escapes goes to warm
your house. It only becomes a problem when you want to run the A/C.

OTOH, if you live south of the Mason Dixon line or your water heater is in the
garage, then yes, you will pay a little more to run a 50 gal heater than a 40
gal. one. Is it significant? Look at the energy tag on the two heaters, but I
suspect the difference is less than $20/year. OTOH, you may find the larger unit
has better insulation, which may compensate.

 

[Rick Blaine]

"mc" <look@www.ai.uga.edu.for.address> wrote:

Heating less water costs less, even with equally efficient heaters.

Sigh. Absolutely true and totally meaningless within the context of this
discussion. Oh wait! This is usenet...

Hint: Direct energy cost is based on _use_ and efficiency, not _capacity_ and
efficiency.

 

[Malcolm Hoar]

In article <HXPrj.11943$hI1.4914@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com>, "Donna Ohl, Grady Volunteer Coordinator" <donna.ohl@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

What's really important, it seems, is the FHR and the EF.

At the risk of repeating myself... and the insulation.

Think about it. How many hours per day do you actually spend
with the hot water faucets turned on?

The tank is "leaking" heat 24 hours per day, 7 days a week.
A well insulated tank will store the energy you used and
paid for. A poorly insulated tank will throw it away.

--
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
| Malcolm Hoar "The more I practice, the luckier I get". |
| malch@malch.com Gary Player. |
| http://www.malch.com/ Shpx gur PQN. |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

[Rick Blaine]

malch@malch.com (Malcolm Hoar) wrote:

If both a 50 gallon and 40 gallon water heater has the same 59 percent
efficiency factor ... do they cost the SAME to heat?

Nope.

Yes they do. Basic physics says that it takes the same amount of energy to heat
the same water, regardless of the container size.

Or does the 50 gallon water heater actually cost more even if it's the same
efficiency?

Yup.

But not because it takes more energy to heat the water, because the heat loss
from the tank is slightly higher.

 

[Edwin Pawlowski]

"Donna Ohl, Grady Volunteer Coordinator" <donna.ohl@sbcglobal.net> wrote in
message

Does anyone know where to find a 40gallon or 50gallon hot water heater
with
that efficiency rating at a major chain (sears or home depot or ???).
http://www.pge.com/res/rebates/

Donna

Why a major chain? They don't give very good service. Try a local plumber
and plumbing supply house for a better deal and usually better units.

 

[mc]

"Donna Ohl, Grady Volunteer Coordinator" <donna.ohl@sbcglobal.net> wrote in
message news:X5Qrj.11945$hI1.9847@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com...

On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 23:10:47 -0500, mc wrote:

Or does the 50 gallon water heater actually cost more
even if it's the same efficiency factor?

Heating less water costs less, even with equally efficient heaters.

Are you sure?

Look at what this energy page says about the Efficiency Factor:
http://www.friendlyplumber.com/plumbing101/washer_heater_energy.html

The "energy factor [is the] number of cycles that can be completed w/ one
kilowatt-hour of electricity".

If that's true, then it's independent of the VOLUME of the water heater.

Strange. Then it isn't a measure of efficiency.

 

[Donna Ohl, Grady Voluntee]

On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 23:42:31 -0500, mc wrote:

"Donna Ohl, Grady Volunteer Coordinator" <donna.ohl@sbcglobal.net> wrote in
message news:X5Qrj.11945$hI1.9847@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com...
On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 23:10:47 -0500, mc wrote:

Or does the 50 gallon water heater actually cost more
even if it's the same efficiency factor?

Heating less water costs less, even with equally efficient heaters.

Are you sure?

Look at what this energy page says about the Efficiency Factor:
http://www.friendlyplumber.com/plumbing101/washer_heater_energy.html

The "energy factor [is the] number of cycles that can be completed w/ one
kilowatt-hour of electricity".

If that's true, then it's independent of the VOLUME of the water heater.

Strange. Then it isn't a measure of efficiency.

I think it was MY MISTAKE to call it an efficiency factor.
It's actually an ENERGY FACTOR.
And, it seems to be independent of the capacity of the tank.
It's dependent on the "cycles".

So, it seems if a 50-gallon water heater has an EF of 0.50, then it takes
two kilowatt hours of power to "cycle" that water heater. Likewise, if a
100-gallon water heater has the same EF, then it takes the same amount of
power to "cycle" that water heater.

Now we have to figure out what a "cycle" is.
I can presume it is to heat up a stated amount of hot water, presumably the
capacity but I don't know that for sure.

If a "cycle" is the capacity, then it would actually cost LESS per gallon
for a 100 gallon water heater than a 50 gallon water heater assuming the
same Energy Factor.

Realistically, all the Home Depot water heaters have a 0.58 or 0.59 EF so
that would indicate, if my assumptions are correct, they the larger ones
(e.g., 50 or 60 gallons capacity) actually costs LESS to operate than the
smaller ones (e.g., 40 gallons capacity) for any given number of gallons
USEAGE.

Can my math possibly hold water?

 

[Rick Blaine]

"Donna Ohl, Grady Volunteer Coordinator" <donna.ohl@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

Good point ... dead capacity vs active usage!

Darn. I wish I understood this EF thing better, especially given two
identical situations where the *only* difference is the CAPACITY.

Based on what you implied, if I inferred correctly, if the USAGE was
exactly the same for two water heaters with the same EF, then the costs to
operate a 50-gallon water heater would be EXACTLY the same as the costs to
operate a 100-gallon water heater (if the Efficiency Factor were the same
for both).

Did I understand the math (and your point) correctly?

Not exactly. There are two types of heat use/loss in a water heater: One is the
heat used to heat the water you are actively using. The other is to reheat the
water that's sitting in the tank all day when you aren't using it.

Both tanks will use the same amount of energy to heat the water you are using
directly. If both tanks have the same efficiency and the same insulation, the
smaller tank will lose less energy to the outside air and thus be slightly less
expensive to operate over the course of a year.

The actual difference in cost is probably not that much. Look at the estimated
annual cost of the two heaters on the yellow energy tag. They normalize for all
that. If one say $180 and the other says $200, that's a rough idea of the
difference in operating costs.