Doorbell always uses electricity!

Wired doorbells have a transformer which is always on and always using electricity. This is yet one more thing in the house which does this like TV, microwave, remote control things, things with clocks, plug-in phones, etc.

These things add up...

I replaced/rewired my switch so the transformer is only on when the doorbell button is pressed! Thus the transformer is off most of the time now.

I installed a regular electrical box at my front door, ran 14 ga. romex from this box to the doorbell transformer, then got a nice brass blank wall plate, drilled a hole in this plate, then installed a 120V momentary push switch in the plate. Then wired this to switch on the transformer when the button is pressed. Then connected the two wires which were going to the old button so the doorbell would ring as soon as it receives power from the transformer.

Reply to
Bill
Loading thread data ...

"Bill" wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@mid.individual.net:

It's probably stamped right on it but I never looked. Any idea how many watts it's uses in it's standby state?

Reply to
Red Green

Congratulations, you've just saved yourself 25 cents a year in electricity. Not to mention it might not be safe if someone is standing on wet pavement and they gey shocked by 120V. You probably spent more in the material than if you let the Xfmr stay on for 20 years. Now how are you going to deal with the TV, fridge, phone, alarm clock, microwave. Wait don't forget VCR/DVD player, cable box, heating system, computer, sprinkler timer,

Reply to
Mikepier

My first thought when reading this was "ok...so we'd save a few pennies a month". But I investigated and found a rather interesting read related to your theory where the author actually tested the doorbell transformer using a Kill-A-Watt:

formatting link
Luckily my doorbell isn't lighted, so it's probably not worth my time and effort to change.

Reply to
Seerialmom

Geeze, I replaced the transformer powered doorbell in my house 10 years ago with a 15 buck wireless chimer. Couple screws and it's done. Replaced the AAA batteries once in all that time.

--Vic

Reply to
Vic Smith

Congratulations. You've just made a potentially lethal accident waiting to happen. And somehow I suspect your insurance won't pay if someone dies. I would STRONGLY suggest you do one of 2 things. 1. Rewire that doorbell to it's original configuration. or 2. Put a GFCI into the circuit

Either way I think would be safe. Option 1 of course would be cheaper, but if you insist on saving the few pennies worth of electricity, then option

2 would work. And it would be a rather interesting experiment to see how often the GFCI trips.
Reply to
J. Cochran

I had a friend some years ago who ran the communications division of the local power company. This was back when they had HF radios for communications and the techs actually had to know something about electronics. They would get electronic interference complaints which were often traced to doorbell transformers. It was a very common problem and one that many people don't even think of today.

TDD

Reply to
The Daring Dufas

Seerialmom wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@r15g2000prh.googlegroups.com:

Great... I'll eat the three bucks a year and take the beating for being an environmental criminal.

Reply to
Red Green

$15 at 25c/year means you'll recover your costs in 60 years. But the batteries cost, oh, $1.00 every ten years, so that's another six bucks which will take another 12 years to recover. But 12 years means one more set of batteries, which requires another four years. Let's see, now (mumble, mumble, carry-the-three), ah, yes.

Your wireless solution will save you money after a mere 73 years of service. This does not count lost opportunity costs of the original $15.

Reply to
HeyBub

With the cost of the parts, romex, etc. The break even date is probably some where in the year 2029. You know, third year of the Gonzalez administration. He took over from the Castro administration.

Reply to
Stormin Mormon

With any luck, he'll also remember the computer, the hair dryer, the pump in the fish tank, and all the other big power drains.

Reply to
Stormin Mormon

My first thought when reading this was "ok...so we'd save a few pennies a month". But I investigated and found a rather interesting read related to your theory where the author actually tested the doorbell transformer using a Kill-A-Watt:

formatting link
Luckily my doorbell isn't lighted, so it's probably not worth my time and effort to change.

=============================================

$3.15/year. Pretty good deal.

Olddog

Reply to
retired54

Mikepier wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@o2g2000yqd.googlegroups.com:

Gotta dig back in my 60's damaged memory synapses but the AC wires in the walls generate an electromagnetic field. Metal that passes through these fields gets induced voltage. So, if you have any metal in what you wear or carry in your pocket you're sucking "some" level of power. Maybe can save another .04 a year by instituting a buck naked policy indoors. Huh?

Reply to
Red Green

yeah, the article stated 3 lousy watts for a *lighted* doorbell. I doubt that an unlighted doorbell switch even draws a watt. It's a transformer but it has *no* load on it at all except for the brief moment it's pushed. Much ado about Nothing.

One watt for a year would be about a dollar a year. The payback on all the OP's effort will take a Long time.

Reply to
Leroy

Doorbells once used carbon-zinc batteries. Their shelf life wasn't good. That explains the change to transformers.

I've tried battery-powered wireless door chimes. I used AA alkalines, which have a much longer shelf life than conventional carbon-zinc. The problem was the current draw of the receivers. A set of batteries would last only a few months, and a lot of visitors might leave frustrated before I realized my chime was out of service.

How about a wired chime using a lithium battery? The battery could outlast a transformer and be cheaper to replace.

Reply to
E Z Peaces

But my chimes sound better. Aren't esthetics worth anything? Do the math.

--Vic

Reply to
Vic Smith

A gfci won't deal with the issue of low voltage wiring carrying 110. It is a fire waiting to happen, especially if there is any possibility of rodents.

It is unfunckingbelievable what people will do to trim off a ten cent/year cost.

That's right. Maybe ten cents in an entire year. maybe.

The cost of the pushbutton guarantees that the change will never ever pay for itself.

And that isn't counting the insane fire hazzard.

Reply to
AZ Nomad

Haven't had that problem like that. Just checked to see if it worked, since I don't get a lot of visitors. It works. The receiver uses 2 C's, so I was wrong on that. The pushbutton is unlighted. You can hear the chimes from outside, so you know it's working. But there's a knocker on the door too, just in case. Ending my part in doorbells and knockers discussion. That's all I know. Carry on.

--Vic

Reply to
Vic Smith

i have a door knocker. My old house had a hand-cranked through-the-door doorbell.

No annoying ground currents to kill the Jehovah's Witnesses.

.max

Reply to
max

Why use battery-powered chimes (as opposed to transmitters)? My wireless chimes plug into outlets (upstairs and downstairs chimes). Being as they make noise, it's not like precise location is critical. The transmitters use a "N" battery every 3-4 years. You do have to check occasionally to make sure it's still working.

The operating cost (75 cents per year for batteries, and whatever the line draw is) is probably more than a transformer-operated bell but we're way down in the noise range of expense.

Dave

Reply to
Dave Garland

HomeOwnersHub website 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.