🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: sci.electronics
Article #21088

Re: 220 vs. 110 motor efficiency

#21088
From: r.l.fletcher
Date: Thu, 06 Apr 1989 16:04
46 lines
2185 bytes
In article <3146@ae.sei.cmu.edu>, rsd@sei.cmu.edu (Richard S D'Ippolito) writes:
> 
> Like, the guy is out to lunch.  First of all, the voltages you get at the
> meter are 120 and 240 by power company tariff.

Well they try to anyway.

[Savings analysis (much thanks for saving me the trouble) deleted.]
[ arrives at $14.77 savings for the season due to line losses]

[estimates conversion from 110 to 220]
> will cost around $50.00 plus your labor plus a building permit plus any fee
> for a certified inspector, if required by your municipality.  When you

I suspect it will be more like $100 to $150. I would guess that 
the existing circuit is on 12/2 WG and some local codes forbid using
the bare ground as a neutral return in a 220V circuit. So you need to
add 100 ft of 12/3 WG and the labor to re-install the run.

Wonder what the pool companies electricians would charge for the
job. 

> 
> The above was rather cute, I realize, but the analysis and numbers are
> correct.
> 
> Rich


If one really wants to save some $$ I suggest you would save more
by experimenting with the number of hours you run the pump per day.
The manual for my pool filter claims I should run it for 10-12hrs/day,
so I did. Until I had the "Free Energy Audit"
by the local power company which suggested I experiment. I am down to
7hrs/day with no effect on water clarity. This season I will try
to get that down to 5-6 hrs per day. This has made a big difference
in my electric bill.

     120V * 18A * 1hr/day * 100 Day / 1000W per KWhr * $0.095/Kwhr = $20.52

Thats $20.52 savings over a 100 day season for each hour per day the
pump is cut back.

Ron Fletcher

Followups are directed to misc.consumers.
Technical Details
Message-ID: <5029@mtgzy.att.com>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uflorida!ukma!rutgers!att!mtuxo!mtgzy!rlf
References: <3272@ihlpm.ATT.COM> <3146@ae.sei.cmu.edu>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uflorida!ukma!rutgers!att!mtuxo!mtgzy!rlf
From: rlf@mtgzy.att.com (r.l.fletcher)
Newsgroups: sci.electronics
Subject: Re: 220 vs. 110 motor efficiency
Summary: Cut back pump usage
Keywords: power
Message-ID: <5029@mtgzy.att.com>
Date: 6 Apr 89 16:04:27 GMT
References: <3272@ihlpm.ATT.COM> <3146@ae.sei.cmu.edu>
Followup-To: misc.consumers
Organization: AT&T, Middletown NJ
Lines: 46