New wiring methods and radical reduction in energy consumption

The following is an object lesson in what can occur as the result of boredom while waiting for a friend to drop by.
In a current discussion (down the page a bit) concerning using a dimmer on a 100
watt lamp and the resulting reduced power consumption (and $$$ savings!):

This reminded me that I have been blessed (some say by God!) with the realization of a few novel wiring methods that could potentially save substantial quantities of electrical energy if implemented on a large scale. These are just the first of potentially many new and powerful energy and cost saving techniques that can be conceived. Any nation, by extending the fundamental principle that drives these simple methods (left for the reader to determine), should receive a significant benefit from reduced electrical energy consumption - perhaps even a slight or not so slight reduction in dependency on some kamikaze d-heads that think murdering women and children a great service to the Creator.
***
1. In new home wiring, for each branch circuit, double the length (at least) of wire needed to run from each device to the next. Include home runs as well. The extra conductor resistance will reduce the current that would otherwise flow in the circuit and therefore reduce the power consumption.
2. For even better results, in addition to #1, undersize the wire by AT LEAST one size (and don't forget to reduce the breaker size accordingly - "safety first" is what I always say). This, in combination with #1, should also eventually result in an even greater hidden savings for those with well pumps (the deeper and more remotely located the better), shop equipment (preferably in remote garages), etc.
3. For those who dare to think big (or small in the case of power consumption), don't connect any cables to their circuit breakers in the main panel. This is VERY powerful technique! You'll be truly amazed at the energy cost savings that this can bring.
Tip for Pros: If the you go this route you could save potentially hundreds of dollars on the installation by not purchasing any of the circuit breakers. This is optional, of course. [Some real pioneers could even experiment with eliminating the panel all together.]
Extra - Fun tip: Those with older style meters can initiate an interesting and potentially lucrative social game. Go around your neighborhood, humbly introducing yourself if need be, and try to gather several neighbors together into any neighbor's house. Now persuade them to wager on whose meter wheel will turn the slowest with everything in the entire home turned on. Then go around to each home and count the number of revs in say 30 seconds. At your abode... well how about that? ZERO! You win!!! Collect your dough. End of game
4. Install dimmers for all incandescent lighting switches. The more you dim those lights the more money you'll save. For best results, dim 100%. [Note: For best results this method should be avoided if you intend to use method #3].
5. As an alternative to #4, use normal switchers but do not install any light bulbs in their sockets. This is actually a much more cost effective solution than #4 since regular switches are dirt cheap. You could extend this technique by applying the principle of #3 - don't connect the wires to any switches... then don't buy any switches, light bulbs.... etc.
Hopefully you now have a better appreciation for just how powerful and applicable the principle inherent in method #3 really is. Imagine the global electrical energy reduction if it were extended and applied to each and every electrical circuit around the world! Phew! What a mind blower!!! Now you can catch a glimpse of my vision.
[Fine print: As with all of these methods, there may be a few minor drawbacks that should be considered before making any application decisions. This is left entirely at the owner's discretion and the author is not responsible for any undesirable side-effects]
****
Well - these are just a few ideas - I'm sure there are many more unrealized possibilities. Maybe you've had some revelations of your own. Feel free to share them since I have little interest in pursuing any patents or copyrights for the Essential Principle. I cannot pretend to own Truth. I am merely a humble servant of humanity that's been given a gift and my reward is the satisfaction of knowing that I have contributed, even if only in some insignificant manner, to the betterment of my fellow Earthlings.
I'm outta here.......
Perion
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
| 1. In new home wiring, for each branch circuit, double the length (at least) of | wire needed to run from each device to the next. Include home runs as well. The | extra conductor resistance will reduce the current that would otherwise flow in | the circuit and therefore reduce the power consumption.
You can certainly reduce the power level this way. But as you do, you also lose even more of that power as waste heat. So as you reduce consumed power, you reduce utilized power even more.
You can save substantially more by just using the next lower step in light bulb wattage in 1/4 of the lights in the house. Changing light bulbs costs far less than rewiring your house.
Many things, such as those using switching power supplies, won't benefit from the voltage drop the lower wire will cause. They will just draw more current and actually INCREASE the power consumption, using what they need, and waste the rest as even more heat in the wire under the "I square R" formula.
| 2. For even better results, in addition to #1, undersize the wire by AT LEAST | one size (and don't forget to reduce the breaker size accordingly - "safety | first" is what I always say). This, in combination with #1, should also | eventually result in an even greater hidden savings for those with well pumps | (the deeper and more remotely located the better), shop equipment (preferably in | remote garages), etc.
Many circuits cannot be reduced. NEC requires 20 amp circuits for one of the larger 120 volt load sources in the house: the kitchen. This option is not available there.
| 3. For those who dare to think big (or small in the case of power consumption), | don't connect any cables to their circuit breakers in the main panel. This is | VERY powerful technique! You'll be truly amazed at the energy cost savings that | this can bring.
Just flip the breaker off. If you really want to save, flip the main breaker off.
| 4. Install dimmers for all incandescent lighting switches. The more you dim | those lights the more money you'll save. For best results, dim 100%. [Note: For | best results this method should be avoided if you intend to use method #3].
Again, lower wattage bulbs. And they prevent you from cheating by turning the dimmer up to full.
| 5. As an alternative to #4, use normal switchers but do not install any light | bulbs in their sockets. This is actually a much more cost effective solution | than #4 since regular switches are dirt cheap. You could extend this technique | by applying the principle of #3 - don't connect the wires to any switches... | then don't buy any switches, light bulbs.... etc.
If you have a switch, why not just use it.
| Hopefully you now have a better appreciation for just how powerful and | applicable the principle inherent in method #3 really is. Imagine the global | electrical energy reduction if it were extended and applied to each and every | electrical circuit around the world! Phew! What a mind blower!!! Now you can | catch a glimpse of my vision. | | [Fine print: As with all of these methods, there may be a few minor drawbacks | that should be considered before making any application decisions. This is left | entirely at the owner's discretion and the author is not responsible for any | undesirable side-effects]
Like the fire caused by the kerosene lamps?
| Well - these are just a few ideas - I'm sure there are many more unrealized | possibilities. Maybe you've had some revelations of your own. Feel free to share | them since I have little interest in pursuing any patents or copyrights for the | Essential Principle. I cannot pretend to own Truth. I am merely a humble servant | of humanity that's been given a gift and my reward is the satisfaction of | knowing that I have contributed, even if only in some insignificant manner, to | the betterment of my fellow Earthlings.
I've found I will waste less power in the form of heat by switching to 480 volts. I'm even considering 2400 volts. I just need to find light bulbs for those voltages.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Phil Howard KA9WGN | http://linuxhomepage.com/ http://ham.org/ |
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

of
The
in
Oh wow - I never thought of that!

There are certainly examples of power consumers that will increase power consumption as voltage is lowered below their design threshold - to a point. I can give a gaurantee with 100% certainty that there is ALWAYS a point at which continued decrease in applied voltage will definitely result in a continued decrease power consumption. Think about it.

LEAST
pumps
(preferably in

Yeh, yeh, I know... Gee - what was I thinkin'? [You can't really be serious in thinking I was serious.... can you???]

consumption),
is
that
off.
There ya go dude! Now you're catching the vision :)

For
light
technique
Whoa! That's pretty profound. I like that. That's like a corollary to an even deeper Truth - "If something Is then it isn't Isn't."

every
drawbacks
left
Well... errrrrhh...mmmm, maybe something like that :)

share
the
servant
to
heh. I know what ya mean. Anyway, maybe just switch to 8' flourescent tubes!
I think I read that for incondescent lamps, stringing those huge insulators inside that little bulb has proved to be a real technical challenge.
Perion
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Principle #3 is the best. If you are not going to connect anything to the panel- and everybody did this- think of the benefits- no power lines, no power plants and their environmental costs, and best of all--- No TV !!!! Side problems do exist such as larger families than planned but the addition of bodies under the blanket will help warm the house.
--
Don Kelly
snipped-for-privacy@peeshaw.ca
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

result of boredom

using a dimmer on a 100

$$$ savings!):

but the point is

by a 50 watt bulb

bulb. From the

watt bulb (and pay

is that the bulbs

still is tiny

with the

potentially save

on a large scale.

powerful energy and cost

extending the

for the reader to

reduced electrical energy

reduction in dependency on

children a great service to

length (at least) of

home runs as well. The

would otherwise flow in

not viable.. if you reduce the voltage to the lights enough to dim them, the power is used up in heating the wire...it has many other problems...on motor circuits such as the refer, too low a voltage, below a 10^% drop endangers it and it will actually draw MORE amps for various reasons.
You would also need a few hundred extra feet to accomplish yer goal bad idea

wire by AT LEAST

accordingly - "safety

should also

those with well pumps

equipment (preferably in

You will burn out the pumps and other motors with that strategy. low voltage a primary cause of burnt motors\

power consumption),

main panel. This is

energy cost savings that

that works
Phil Scott
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

In saying "the power is used up in heating the wire" I hope you really don't imagine that if you dim an incandescent lamp from 100% to say 10% of its full non-dimmed state that somehow the circuit wiring will exhibit an increased circuit heating and that the circuit's overall power consumption will remain the same!
Assume you have a triac (phase control) dimmer controlling some purely resistive load. I was going to do the calculations but a simpler way to illustrate the process is to just imagine dimming the load from its 100% full on state to its fully dimmed state in precise 10% increments. Back at the circuit's breaker, hang an ammeter on its phase (hot) conductor and place a voltmeter lead on each of the circuit's two wires and record the current and voltage at each stage of dimming. Calculate the circuit's power (current reading times voltage reading) for each of the intervals. Considering that the circuit voltage at the breaker remains constant you tell me what a graph of the power for that branch circuit would look like as you dim the load.
Now go out to the dimmer and repeat the process but this time just use the ammeter and record the current to the load. Since the power dissipated as heat in any wire is equal to I^2 x R, without even having to measure R, you tell me whether the wires get hotter or cooler as you progressively dim the load and record the current readings. Using your first amperage measurements, do the branch circuit wires get hotter or cooler as you dim the load? Bottom line - triac dimming a resistive load doesn't transfer the original power from one portion of the circuit (the load) to another (the wiring). It reduces the total consumed power since it is reducing the circuit's current by time-proportional blocking. If, instead of a triac dimmer, you used a power rheostat in series with the load, gradually increasing its series resistance from zero to the its R value, then the PROPORTION of power dissipation would progressively shift from the load to the rheostat up to a max value (it's just a voltage divider circuit now) but the overall total circuit's power consumption would progressively decrease as total circuit resistance increased. Also, the wires to the load would get progressively cooler - not hotter - since the circuit's amperage would be decreasing in proportion to the increased total circuit resistance.

Not to worry! After the OL device trips or even better, the motor burns up, you'll have very nice DECREASE in amps and power consumption :-)

Yes - the cost of the wire is a bummer. Payback period in hundreds of years probably.

Exactly! Like I said, burned up motors equals savings on power consumption. They're a GOOD thing (in the context of saving money on electrical power).
Bye, Perion
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Perion wrote:

Huh?
You snip a section out of the existing cabling, and use that. This reduces the consumption in that circuit to zero, and allows some reduction in the circuit you're extending. Postive energy cost saving, and zero expenditure on wire.
On a slightly more serious note, reducing the voltage on a circuit does not necessarily reduce the energy consumption. In particular, heating and cooling devices are usually thermostatically controlled, and will respond to a reduced voltage by drawing current for longer.
My mind is too bufuzzled at the moment to figure out the net effect, if any, of the thermostatic hysteresis on this.
Sylvia.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

enough
you really don't

say 10% of its full

exhibit an increased

consumption will remain the

errrr thats a bogus argument son.
You recommended using *longer wire . NOT a triac... in your remarks.
longer wire does waste the energy just as I stated.... you are trying to trash me now because a Triac doesn't waste as *much energy is simply bogus ( it still wastes energy)
You lack integrity... and you waste time. not impressive.
Phil Scott
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.