What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
$52 and Up—Airlines Slash Fares On Peak Holiday Flights. view!
travelzoo.com - This year, waiting until the last minute is NOT the best strategy. See why.
78 Comments
- DWatch, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5bigdave: the 'tech info' you requested was in the article.... read it again. The water is heated with MICROWAVES. This hasn't been done before. Tankless has been done before with various gas heat exchangers, but to get the volume of hot water needed for a real-world family use situation, electric powered heating elements can't keep up with the volume of water flow, unless the element is massive, and requires huge amounts of electricity. The use of microwaves eliminates the need for the old resistance-based heating element. IF THIS WORKS as advertised, those in rural areas with only electric, and no natural gas (like me) can convert their old tank water heater, eliminating the need to always have a tank of water at 120+ degrees, saving electricity. I only use hot water to take showers and wash dishes. Its a waste having to heat water all day for 20 minutes a day of use.
donwilson: the water is heated as it flows thru the device on the way to your shower head. - OutcastJiob, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4It heats "on demand," donwilson, using the same principle that tankless gas water heaters have been using for who knows how many years. Not only does that mean it eliminates the need to have a huge storage tank and cuts your energy costs because it doesn't have to keep said tank hot, you'll also never run out of hot water again.
And the benefit of using microwave technology instead of burning gas is that electricity has at least the potential to be completely renewable and extremely inexpensive. Solar, wind, hydro, all those forms of enviromentally-friendly and nearly limitless energy production.
I'm very happy about this. +Digg - lbermude, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2pfff no digg.
What is all the fuzz? I have been doing that for decades with gas which is even more efficient:
http://www.plumbingsupply.com/index-tanklesswaterheaters.html
(Have you noticed how the "check spelling" does not like thw word "digg"?) - okvol, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The actual trend is to replace the coal-fired plants with natural gas, because of pollution issues. Some states are now suffering from volatile pricing due to this and not just companies like Enron.
What we need are modern, safer nuclear plants, wind turbines, and other reasonable alternative non-combustion based energy sources.
Europe has used on-demand hot water systems for years. I knew an engineer who wanted to buy one here in the states, and could not find one. It's all marketing. Or, as a communist would say, decrepit capitalism. - jburchel, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I don't think there is significant cost in keeping water in a hot water tank heated, as it is well insulated. The main cost is heating the water to the desired temperature. I requested info from the company on a watt per watt comparison of energy used to heat a given amount of water, which is really what matters. Silly people who think this is "green" just because it doesn't use gas are ignorant and reactive. Most electricity comes from non-"green" sources, and will continue to for the near future, so mandating use of electric only sources does not help the environment, just their poor consciences. Might make them feel good, but doesn't really help solve any problems in the REAL world... Typical digg fare... unfortunately. I was psyched about digg, until I realized, mobb rule leads to lowest common denominator results. That's why professionals get paid money to produce things, and communism doesn't work. ;)
- loginname, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3"Hot" water heater.... why would you need to heat "hot" water. ;)
- yaroze, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3the only problem I have is this, if there is a disaster (Earthquake, Volcano Eruption, Hurricane, Terror Attack, Massive Power outage etc.) your hotwater tank, is a great EMERGENCY source of clean water.
especially when it takes several days for fresh water to be reestablished, just remember to turn off the supply line feeding the tank, not to contaminate it when such an event happens. - quakefiend, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1maybe a tiny bit, but not much. Most electricity is produced with coal, which we have plenty of.
- TheTitan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1hey, one step closer to the microwave weapon from Batman Begins!!!
- outside4, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1" Most electricity comes from non-"green" sources, and will continue to for the near future, so mandating use of electric only sources does not help the environment, just their poor consciences"
That's 100% correct. There's no free lunch. So we don't allow nuclear energy, but the "green culture" insists on less fossil fuels. Guess what, we are burning coal, which pumps out uranium into the air by the way. And don't go into the whole solar, wind, tidal solutions - as they can augment but their current efficiencies as I am aware of cannot replace, especially as we grow more tech gadget oriented and require more draw. More xbox 360's for everyone! - mgorbsky, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I can see it now - "Mommy, why do I glow in the dark after taking a bath?"
:-P - joeyjojo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1For a bunch of technology geeks, it's seems a lot of us are unable to comprehend on-demand water heaters.
- rmitchell, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I've been waiting and wondering when they were going to find an alternative for gas water heaters (I know it sounds stupid but I really have thought about it before.)
;) - spect3r, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Ok.
Solar Heating is STILL the cheapest/best/friendliest/neatest (and most expensive) - scbysnx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@ seanl ok.. you and everyone else who says "resistive heat is 100% efficient" are getting on my nerves. You are very right all of the electricity is transfered to heat but that does NOT TRANSLATE TO HEATING EFFICIENCY the microwave could produce more heat per watt then resistive heat. thats how it could be more efficient
- moose_diggs, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Ummmmm as far as heating already HOT water... conventional hot water heaters do it ALL DAY LONG!!!!!!....get a clue people..99% of the commenters here have no idea how plumbing , hot water etc etc in average homes is created. Quick lesson: Tank style hot water heaters store hot water all the time.. and reheat the water on demand ( as it cools below a preset temperature) so YES you heat HOT water all the time!!!!!
Now for as far as is this noteworthy or money saving .. who the hell knows from the article posted. Hot water on demand has been around for some time. Small units under sinks that have coils where the water runs across them on demand .. creating an almost instant endless supply of hot water have been around at least 20 yrs. - placebored, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@jburchel: Mob rules is not communism, it's democracy, and if you don't like digg, all you have to do is leave.
@all the semantics nazis: You are right to claim that the article is not about hot water heaters. In most common usages however (in this country at least), the term "hot water heater" is neither stupid nor incorrect. What is that fluid in the big tank at nearly all times other than immediately following a shower or bath if not "hot water?" What does the heater attached to the tank do then nine tenths of the time (if not more)? It keeps the water in the tank - which is already hot - hot, so that whenever you need it, you get water at the same high temperature you have come to expect. That IS, in fact, a "hot water heater," no? - scairborn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1LET THE LONG HOT SHOWERS COMMENCE!
- haydiv, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1does this mean I have to run around with a gonad shield at home ?
- superrandomguy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Keep this thing away from your wireless router..
- dbpigeon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Hope it's cheap (the heater itself, not the bills. i know they'll be cheap.)
- rochlin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This is mostly hype:
FALSE: Energy savings. Water heaters are very efficient appliances. Unless you use hot water only very intermittantly, storing the water doesn't cost much. Heating something up is one thing that can be done very efficiently because most waste energy is...heat. Heating with microwaves is FASTER than normal electric elements or flames, but not significantly more efficent.
TRUE: This will heat water more quickly than older methods which means more gallons per hour than older on-demand systems.
VOLATILE GAS PRICES: That comment pretty much subverts any credibility they might have had. Electric prices can be very volatile and are dependent on gas & coal costs. Normally electric prices are higher than gas prices for an equivalent amount of heating. - levitymn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0the tech info in this article is that is can heat from 35 to 140 in seconds. I looked into tankless water heaters when I had to replace mine but current technologies cannot heat our cold Minnesota water which is around 35 in the winter to 100 let alone the 120 that most hot water heaters run at. If it stands up to it's claims it will be a boon in the upper mid-west.
- WalkaWalka, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0actually NASA looked at this concept for the space station back in 1984.. after spending lots of money they gave up when someone pointed out the efficencies of the magnetrons back then for converting electrical energy into BTUs was ridiculously low and they should have never started the project.. maybe .. somehow magnetrons have gotten much more efficient.. or the price of oil has gone up so far?.. nah.. it just doesn't even seem possible.. you burn oil to create electricity to microwave water.. direct heating by convection seems like it will always be simpler and more direct.. it also seems to me there is also an inverse time over heat change per unit that would say something like.. faster you heat more energy required.. I just don't buy it
- samby, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Here's some figures that maybe I messed up on - if someone could point out where I'd appreciate it:
Problem: Take a typical 'low-flow' showerhead (2.5 gpm) in the US and see how many watts are needed to heat the water from 35 to 140 F.
1 gal = 3785 cc
2.5 gal/min * 3785 cc/gal / 60 sec/min = 157.7 cc /sec
1 calorie = raise 1 cc 1 degree celsius
35 to 140 F = 60 degrees celsius
157.7 cc/sec * 60 celsius = 9462.5 cc-celsius/sec = cal/sec
1 cal/sec = 4.1868 J/sec = 4.1868 W
so 9462.5 cal/sec = 9462.5 * 4.1868 W = 40,000 Watts ????
Did I miss something? No one could supply 40 thousand watts in their home. That's like 30 hair dryers or something ;).
Perhaps thats why this can't work with electricity and can only work with gas.
- Tobey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Moose diggs, by the time the water gets below the temperature threshold; it'll just be warm water. Therefore, "hot water heater" is still an oxymoron.
- joeyjojo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"ut was told that we would have to change all of the water lines in the house to larger diameter pipes because these types of heaters take in much more water because they don't have a storage pool of it waiting on demand in a tank."
Ask 3 home remodellers the same question and you will get 3 entirely different answers.
I am confused by this one, though. On demand heating heats the water that you use...at the rate you use it. If you take a shower with you current pipe size, then it will heat that water at that rate for you. Unless you want twice the water coming out of your shower as it is now, there would be no need to increase the size of your pipes.
And yes, the danger of microwaving water IN THE MICROWAVE, is that there is sometimes nothing to disturb the water to start it visibly boiling (just as super-cold water can still be liquid if there isn't something to start the freezing). Obviously, runnning water wouldn't have that problem. - Cyanidtransistr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I'm not worried about cost, im worried about getting the shaft like a poor shellfish at Redlobster. check this out...
Taken from: http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/gen99/gen99802.htm
...warning of the dangers
of heating water in the microwave. THe warning suggested that upon
removal from the microwave, water can "explode" and cause serious
burns...
...Yes, it is true that a vessel of water heated in a microwave can be
superheated, that is, the temperature of the water can be above its
spontaneous boiling point. When the water is disturbed, it can then boil
violently... - gherikill, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Sweet, but I'd like to see some #'s to back it up.
- just_chris, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Yes tankless has been around for a long time, but they never really caught on in the US. That's because tankless heaters couldn't supply enough water at a time. For example, you couldn't take a shower and run the dishwasher at the same time. Fuel is more expensive in Europe and people don't shower as often, so tankless heaters are a slam dunk. :-p But recently new tankless versions have overcome this limitation, but the problem is they are about 5+ times the cost of a traditional water heater. A new tankless will pay for itself in a years time, but most builders and homeowners don't want to front the extra expense.
- hightechredneck, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0why heat Hot water
shouldn't be a water heater - scbysnx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@ jburchel you are correct! kind of.. Electricity offers alternative sources like wind, nuclear, hydro and solar. Natural gas produces much less polution then coal or oil but still polutes more then wind nuclear (if waste is stored properly) hydro (well there is ofcourse the eco change problem but I look at that more as adaptive changes rather then detremental effects the earth change a lot more over the eons then we have ever changed it!!!!) and solar is constantly increasing in efficiency. I e-mailed the company asking them about efficiency specs etc. I don't really know much about how much power a microwave would use as compared to normal electric since I've never really researched microwave technolodgy before. A quick search turned up this "how much electricity does my stuff use?" website http://michaelbluejay.com/electricity/howmuch.html looks like a normal microwave anyway.. that heats water pretty quick for my easy mac :-D uses less wattage then a normal water heater..
@ swooper I don't follow what you're trying to say?? are you trying to say this isn't news because tankless has been around a long time? if so I ask you this.. wheres the "microwave" heater on lowes.com? - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0> Keep this thing away from your wireless router..
Why do you think you have a wireless router in the first place? 2.4ghz was considered a "trash" part of the spectrum and the FCC decided to do a little experimentation... it took it a couple of years to take off, but once it got started... man, oh, man.... one government agency's trash is another industry sector's treasure.
> A microwave unit would only use about 12-15 amps and use a
> standard 120V outlet to heat the same amount of water.
I forget how do you get kilowatt hours from amps and voltage... oh, that's right volts x amps (thanks google). Seems that it might run at 1.8 kilowatt/hours... but at what flow rate? It does look promising.
Now... time for a little home economics (I'm going to use me since I'm such a shining example... almost devoid of exceptions and corner cases).
I'm paying about .46 per kilowatt/hr.
I take 1 20minute shower a day (on average) (10 hours in the shower per month... no dishwasher, no hot water in the washing machine... literally, I don't have it hooked up.)
and my gas bill runs about $35/month (currently have an on-demand natural gas water heater... little to no gas range cooking)
I need to know how many watts this thing uses in an hour (at my showerhead flow rate) to know if it is going to pay off or not. Since the manufacture decided to make a press release without releasing product details, it looks like I will be forced to back-end the calculation.
$35/month buys me 76 kilowatt/hours of electrons... so was long as this thing can produce hot water for an hour using less than 7.6 kilowatts, it won't cost me more than I'm already paying. Ideally, I'd like the damned thing to pay for itself; so, somewhere in the neighborhood of 3 to 4 kilowatts per hour would be far better.
Alright, Pulsar Advanced Technologies, time to pony up and see if you got anything "revolutionary" or not. If the previous digg comment was right, it looks like you're going to have a killer product (at least in my market)
Also suggest that you get a new PR company. - wa0auu, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Your lights go dim because you have your micro wave oven wired with to small of wire and or you have ore than just the micro wave on one breaker. i have an old Amana micro wave, one of the first ones that came out and my lights never go dim when I turn it on. That is because i have it on its own breaker.
I would like to know the AMPS this unit takes, it must be 220 Volts AC. If i know the amsp and the voltage I can figure the watts. i would like to know ths size in inches, the size of a stero speaker really does not tell me anything.
best 73'S DE WAØAUU - Tobey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Well I doubt they'd build it so that it was able to heat water passed the boiling point. I'm sure it will have ton of safty features to prevent stuff like that from happening.
- XStatic, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0The question to be answered is not one of efficiency, or the ability to turn electrical watts into a given rise in temperature as resistance elements are pretty darn efficient, especially when fully immersed.
The real question is how high can the temperature rise given a rate of flow.
Tankless gas beats electric and US consumers demand this high transfer rate.
The cost savings comes from the device being tankless, the ability to use electric instead of gas will be determined by how much energy can be transferred into the water. - XStatic, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Posted on: 04/11/2003
Electro Silica has developed a new technology for heating and purifying water.
Electro Silica has announced that it has developed a new way for heating and purifying water. The company applies a new technology to water treatment, offering an efficient water heater powered by a clean and renewable energy. It offers the ability to save water and energy using microwave technology.
http://www.pmengineer.com/CDA/ArticleInformation/features/BNP__Features__Item/0,2732,96706,00.html - phantom1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0pretty cool. hey and its in my city! go Montreal
i know i use a ton of hot water. especially in the winter. where is minus 30 celcius here sometimes. makes me feel like im on the beach again:) - scbysnx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@t35t0r actually by that line of logic all you would need is a bigger supply line to the water heater.. you don't need any more water going to your sink
- seanl, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Electric heating element based *tankless* water heaters have been around for years. Electric elements are 100% efficient, so there is no way for a microwave-based heater to be more efficient. I would imagine the advantage for microwaves is that large heating elements take time to heat up due to their mass whereas a magnetron comes on instantaneously. This would give this heater an advantage for short usages of hot water like washing your hands, but for long usages like showers it would have to be less efficient than a heating element based heater. Some or all of that could be offset by a design that doesn't lose as much heat to the air, however.
- Tobey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Sweet, this sounds safe...
And yes, the name, Hot water heater is the perfect exaple of an oxymoron. I've never understood why they were called that. - t35t0r, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0No go for most older homes with smaller water lines. We asked a plumber if we could go with one of the no water storing electric water heaters (because our previous one was leaking and we didn't want a repeat in another 10 years) but was told that we would have to change all of the water lines in the house to larger diameter pipes because these types of heaters take in much more water because they don't have a storage pool of it waiting on demand in a tank. So unless you have the larger diameter pipes throughout the house you probably won't be able to use a tankless water heater.
- vperez, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Well there's no reason why you couldn't heat hot water, and hot is a relative term so your water heater might heat water you consider hot to an even hotter temperature, but ummm yeah I just call it a water heater.
- Tobey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Seanl, an electric element tankless water heater uses about 50 amps and requires a 240V service to the house. A microwave unit would only use about 12-15 amps and use a standard 120V outlet to heat the same amount of water.
You tell me which is more efficient. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Interesting stuff about using calories in calculations:
http://www.answers.com/topic/calorie - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0>>> Heating with microwaves is FASTER than normal electric elements or flame
>>Here's some figures that maybe I messed up on
>The above calculations are correct. Taken from:
your book numbers are probably based upon surface area heating (heat transferred from a boundary surface to an interior volume) and not volumetric heating (heating occurring throughout a volume)...
you'd think a gram of water would be small enough to negate any boundary surface effects, but you never know... - oldcyborg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I'll point out a few things for you. Microwaves take incredible electric to start up the transformer. Haven't you ever seen the lights dimm when someone hits the on button on a microwave? So there is more involved than they are letting on.
Another point is that think how the power companies raise hell in the summer, because of air contitioning and the brownouts that occur over half the nation... Wait till the peak demand, morning and evening, not to mention, many people still use hot water for clothes washing. Those powders aren't that good....... They will raise the hell out of electric pricing due to supply and demand.....
Natural gas prices doubled last month!! Doubled here in WV. Big Utility brother wants gas to cost as much as electric. So, I don't see any real savings here. The water still has to be heated, and you may have to run a separate wire and circuit breaker to each microwave heater!!! I am NOT kidding about the power draw of any microwave oven, and this will have to be just as powerful to heat water all the way from cold to hot, instaneously?????
I will just keep my gas water heater and replace it every 10 years or so, with a new 120.00 one. The prices stay the same, only the years of service deteriorate. How long will a Microwave water heater last???? Seems to me that we buy one more often than 10 years..
It won't take but a year or so for us to find out. BTW, The Green people will just raise hell if we burn any coal... It is high sulfur content and without a doubt, causes just as much greenhouse gas as power plants. (heheheh) That will cause higher costs due to stiffer regulations.
I didn't mean to pee in anyones mess kit, but I can find as many reasons it won't fly, or won't turn out to be what the man said, and I just got started. I sure as Hell am not replacing my brand new copper water lines just so the pipes can be bigger.hehe I had to chase this plumber down every day at his noon eating spot, and beg him to come and work on my house. I liked the guy, but he was getting more attention than my wife was.....hehehehe
Well, Ya'll think about these things for awhile and see how many more YOU can come up with. :)
Cyborg - ericd543, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0My BS meter is coming off its peg. Their web site is under construction - no brochures, no photos, no info. Googling the company name reveals only a few appearances at trade shows. Reminds me of broadband over natural gas lines. Hype, yes. A real product? Perahps.
- scbysnx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Dear Michael,
We will have approval for the U.S, Market by early January 2006. As for the
specs you require, we can make it available to you in the near future as we
are still awaiting certain test reports. Remain in contact with us.
Best Regards,
Jerry Climan-V.P. Market Research
WOW THAT WAS FAST! but no info :-( - samby, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0The above calculations are correct. Taken from:
http://www.iaei.org/magazine/04_b/04_b_harman.htm
As an example, the specification for one water heater indicates that the heater is capable of raising the input water temperature 63°F (35°C) at a steady flow rate of 3.0 GPM ... As calculated in the appendix to this article, a power input of about 28 kW is necessary to heat the water flowing at 3 GPM to 120°F.
So thats 28KW instead of 40KW for about half the temperature raise (35 C instead of 60 C). So the calculations check out.
The article says in can raise the water from 35 to 140F (60 C) "in seconds". Well, how much water? As we can see, if its 2.5 gpm flow that will take 40KW. That's a 'minimum' - just because you're using microwaves doesn't mean you can violate the laws of physics!!
So the conclusion seems to be that you need 10's of thousands of watts to do this properly. That's 3 or 4 independent 40 amp circuits in a house easy (30KW / 220 volts = 130 amps). Most people don't have that kind of spare electrical capacity in their homes.
This story is more hype than practical. -
Show 51 - 78 of 78 discussions
Catch all of your favorite Digg shows in one place, including Digg Dialogg, Diggnation, The Digg Reel and More!
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is