No, not really. The cost of maintaining the thermal mass will go up a bit,
but surface area for heat loss must be taken into consideration and it is
not linear. The cost of taking say, 20 gallons of hot water out of the tank
and replacing it with 20 gallons of cold water, is the same.
Wrong. With storage tank heaters, the primary cost is usage, not heat loss from
the tank. Given that volume increases much faster than surface area, given the
same amount of use, you might see a slight increase in cost, but I'd bet it
won't be noticable.
Not really. It takes a little bit more to keep the thermal mass warm all
the time, but you have more water to draw from when needed. The real cost
is the energy needed to heat up the replacement water coming into the tank.
Tanks are better insulated today than they were years ago. My 40 gallon
tank can hold the water hot for a couple of days with no added heat if no
hot water was used is used.
Depends on temp setting and how many users. Operating cost is a function
of how many minutes per day that burner is lit. Living alone, I could
probably get by with a 20 gallon. A house with 3 teenagers, even a 40
gallon is struggling to keep up. I'd go with a well-insulated 40 gallon,
for resale value if nothing else, if you have multiple bedrooms. You
burn a little more gas getting 40 gallons warm than 30, but it cycles
less often if there are multiple users. To save money, turn the temp
setting down to the lowest you feel safe with and can stand to shower
with. (120 or so?)
On Sun, 23 Aug 2009 09:39:54 -0400, aemeijers wrote:
I had a 40 gallon that I set at the temperature the pilot kept it at and
had no problems with hot water. The pilot was all that was needed to keep
it warm. Increased storage cost will only increase in a gas water heater
if you want hotter water. Otherwise the cost to run the pilot light should
be about the same no matter what the size of the water heater.
far better off with the larger tank.
Vertex tanks are very high efficency and now qualify for the federal
30% tax credit. Plus their recovery is awesome. Never run out of hot
although vertex tanks do cost more.
Since our fairly well insulated (as from the factory) ELECTRIC hot
water tank, in our slightly cooler basement loses heat so slowly that
the water is still tepid after being away for a couple of weeks with
it completely shut off (Yes that surprised us too!); opinion here is
that heat loss from the tank itself or because a larger hot water tank/
heater be installed is almost insignificant.
After all;even a heater holding twice the amaount of hot water does
not have 'twice' the surface area from which to lose heat!
e.g. Volume for a 'round' tank = circular area times height!
and twice volume = say, twice circular area times same height.
Since area = pi x r squared; the r squared would only have to double
for the tank volume , or in other words the ' r ' (unsquared, would
only have to increase by 1.4 times. And consequently the outside heat
losing surface, of a tank holding twice the volume would only increase
1.4 times. So one could argue that, for that small difference, a
bigger tank might be more efficient: in not losing static heat?
What does cost the money is to actually heat the water, by some 100
degrees F from typical ground water temperature of say 50 deg. F to
perhaps 150 deg. F. Note 1. After that how much hot water is used or
Gas (except expensive bottled propane) not available here so have
never used gas hot water heater.
Understand the advantage is that piped-in gas is a relatively cheaper
fuel and/or the 'recovery rate of a gas powered hot water heater can
be faster? Whether that in itself leads to more usage depends on the
habits of the occupants/users.
Note 1: Some health departments call for, or recommend at least 160
deg. F for sanitary/safe dish washing! Whereas to prevent, say
children from scalding themselves nothing higher than 120 deg. F is
all water heaters should have a energy guide label with yearly
operating costs on label.
for me cost of hot water isnt nearly as important as comfort and
convenience which is why I upgraded to a 50 gallon 75,000 BTU water
heater, from my old 30 gallon 29,000 BTU unit/ this more than doubled
the amount of hot water available. we rarely run out. money well spent
Yes, no, definitely, and maybe.
It depends on the temperature it's set on. It also depends on the demand.
If the 30 was marginal in providing hot water usage, the 40 will work less.
Yes, it will take the same amount of energy to heat up the same amount of
water, but from the same starting point. If the 40 has some warm water
left, the starting temperature is going to be more than if cold water from
the pipe is heated.
IMHO, the 40 wouldn't have to work as hard, but then there are the issues of
heat loss during periods of nonuse. So, wrap it good, and whatever you get
is whatever you get.
Not sure, but I would say the one with thicker insulation and lower ef
value will probably have the lower operating cost. Where I live it
costs 2X as much to heat water with electricity than with natural
gas--of course that can change but it hasn't in the last 20 years.
The burner comes on only when the water cools down enough to
cool the sensor. That's because of
1) use of hot water by opening a faucet
2) heat loss through the walls of the tank
3) heat loss up the chimney
The difference between heat loss of a 30 or 40 is minimal.
The 40 is cheaper to buy and install, since it's a more
common size. I'd go with the 40.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.