Is there a thread or area to discuss TED5000 results?

[tlveik]

I see no reason not to have discussions like this here.  It's not like this forum is overly active.

I can add one data point to the compressor heater question.  Mine doesn't have a heater.  Not a heat pump, AC only.  2 ton, Carrier.

[jfpetesn]

I've been watching this thread for a few days now and I guess I have a little different opinion on the whole energy savings thing.  All my energy related decisions are based strictly on cost/benefit ratios.  It appears that some are currently focusing on HVAC crankcase heaters.  Every HVAC compressor has them and they are necessary for several reasons.  They are thermostatically controlled and do not run 24/7 365.  Lets assume they use 30 watts/hr for 100 days/yr 72 kWh/yr roughly $4.32/yr.  Personally I can't see the need for a government mandate to save half of that say $2.00/yr??  Makes no sense.  I'm all for trying to save money and perhaps power but it is a personal choice.

I can't imagine spending the time to trace down a stray 30-100 watts. Then I find it is an old UPS, Computer, or TV so I am going to go out and buy a new component for $$ to replace the working old one to save me $5.00/yr?  Just doesn't make sense to me.  When that old component fails then I will try to replace it with something more efficient.  If you want to save why not go back to wood heat and eliminate the AC all together.  Unplug the luxuries and read books.  I just think we have to have some perspective here.  Everything is a choice and for me I don't need anymore government mandates.

I have a large home with many gadgets.  I use about 55 kWh/day. I am a power user and I am proud of it.  Before some of you crawl out of your skin, I am also the most energy efficient guy within 50 miles or more.  I have an energy star rated home, R50 in the attic, low E glass, 95% LED lighting, geothermal HVAC and my pride and joy 13,000 KW of solar.  I produce about 95-97% of my energy needs.  These are my choices and I don't impost them on anyone else.  I made the choices I have based upon cost/benefit.  These are different for all of us.

In summary, I think it is great that we have energy savings discussions on this board.  I might find a tip or two I might even use but what disturbs me is when the conversation goes to maybe the government mandates and force people to do this or that.  That's where I draw the line.  If there is a financial benefit to doing something then everything else will follow.

[tlveik]

Actually, my main motivation for owning a TED isn't to find small ways to save money on electricity.  It's just interesting to me to monitor things like this.  I know a lot about electricity and already had a good idea of what things were likely to be energy wasters before I bought my TED 5000.

One of the things I like about my TED is that through PlottWatt, I'm able to monitor power usage when I'm away from home.  This allows me to verify that certain power users are operating correctly while I'm away.

[jfpetesn]

PlottWatt doesn't play well with 2 MTU's and Solar.  I am sending data but other than logging data it does no analysis.  I have been able to remotely access my footprints on my iPhone so I can keep a close watch on my system.  I mainly use my TED to double check on my solar production.  After much analysis and calibration I now have it tracking my bidirectional electric meter within 0.3% so I know if they are crediting my account properly.  I am due to go on to an hourly pricing program so my TED will be extremely important to make sure the charges vs credits are calculated correctly.  I have been working on some spreadsheets that will allow me to do the same calculations that the utility will do.  I am amazed how close to my meter I have been able to get my TED.

[jlsoaz]

I see no reason not to have discussions like this here.  It's not like this forum is overly active.

I can add one data point to the compressor heater question.  Mine doesn't have a heater.  Not a heat pump, AC only.  2 ton, Carrier.

Hi tlveik:

I'm not sure why there's little discussion of non-support topics here, but my thought is that it's possibly related to the fact that the forum is labeled as being for support.  If there were a dedicated area or thread, maybe that would encourage discussion of non-support things (but I don't really know).  I don't know of many places around the net in general to discuss the sorts of building efficiency topics that may pertain to those of us who use a TED device, even if built environment efficiency is in some ways a vital and central topic to global carbon pollution reduction, capital expenditure conservation and energy conservation general efforts.

One other place I know of where some built environment efficiency is somewhat discussed:

http://www.fieldlines.com/index.php?board=9.0

This is really though from a remote living angle I guess.

I haven't really looked around hard though.  Maybe somewhere in yahoo groups or google groups.

[jlsoaz]

I've been watching this thread for a few days now and I guess I have a little different opinion on the whole energy savings thing.  All my energy related decisions are based strictly on cost/benefit ratios.  It appears that some are currently focusing on HVAC crankcase heaters.  Every HVAC compressor has them and they are necessary for several reasons.  They are thermostatically controlled and do not run 24/7 365.  Lets assume they use 30 watts/hr for 100 days/yr 72 kWh/yr

Thanks for the calculation, 6 kWh per month would be about 2% of my use, give or take.  During a time when I'm not home, I'll estimate it's up to about 7% of my home's use.  I don't know if it's really accurate though.  I guess I'll keep an eye open for a few more data points on whether all units might be on this third of the time you mention.

roughly $4.32/yr.  Personally I can't see the need for a government mandate to save half of that say $2.00/yr??  

At first look around, a government mandate would appear to be a moot point, since for the moment, there don't appear to be any prominent options.

Makes no sense.  I'm all for trying to save money and perhaps power but it is a personal choice.

Reasons that government is involved in this (such as in mandating minimum SEER) include global carbon concerns, general pollution and other concerns.  If a viable technological alternative presents itself to the wasteful sounding issue, it might be just a matter of incorporating the expectation of the technology into the minimum SEER rating.

I can't imagine spending the time to trace down a stray 30-100 watts. Then I find it is an old UPS, Computer, or TV so I am going to go out and buy a new component for $$ to replace the working old one to save me $5.00/yr?  Just doesn't make sense to me.  

At this point, I think you're well past setting up your straw man to argue with.  A reason for others of us to track down a vampire load or other issue might be simply to unplug that which does not need to be plugged in, not necessarily to throw it away.

When that old component fails then I will try to replace it with something more efficient.  If you want to save why not go back to wood heat and eliminate the AC all together.  Unplug the luxuries and read books.  I just think we have to have some perspective here.  Everything is a choice and for me I don't need anymore government mandates.

I have a large home with many gadgets.  I use about 55 kWh/day. I am a power user and I am proud of it.  Before some of you crawl out of your skin, I am also the most energy efficient guy within 50 miles or more.  I have an energy star rated home, R50 in the attic, low E glass, 95% LED lighting, geothermal HVAC and my pride and joy 13,000 KW of solar.  I produce about 95-97% of my energy needs.  These are my choices and I don't impost them on anyone else.  I made the choices I have based upon cost/benefit.  These are different for all of us.

In summary, I think it is great that we have energy savings discussions on this board.  I might find a tip or two I might even use but what disturbs me is when the conversation goes to maybe the government mandates and force people to do this or that.  That's where I draw the line.  If there is a financial benefit to doing something then everything else will follow.

Going by your 55 kWh/day and 95-97% figure, I'm thinking 13,000 kW is a typo, and you have 13 kW.    

Your home and solar array sound impressive, but if you are using 55 kWh per day, then I'm going to say it's quite possible you are not using energy particularly efficiently.  I think more info would be needed to settle the matter (such as whether you use Propane, Natural Gas or neither, how many square or cubic feet of home, how many denizens, perhaps whether you are powering an EV, whether you are powering quite a bit of computer electronics that needs to be on in some way 24x7, etc.) but something on the order of 1600 kWh per month makes me think that within a 50 mile radius of where you live, there are probably (to say the least) quite a few people who are using energy more efficiently than you are.  I suppose some do count solar as an "efficiency" measure (I do not) rather than a harvesting measure, and by that standard, yes, I can see how you'd start to claim that you have high efficiency.

[jfpetesn]

You are correct I have a 13.2kW array.  The point I am trying to make is that it is all about personal choices, not the governments.  All of us have hobbies and if putting everything under a microscope looking for phantom loads be my guest.  Just not my cup of tea. Conversely, if I want to be a user of electricity then that is my choice.  I know how to manage loads and I just choose to use electricity.  We have a large house with 3 refrigerators, pool, computer server, etc and I agree, I use more power than most.  Could I conserve? Sure, but my choice (or hobby) is to embrace new technology and in turn add independent energy sources to make up for my energy use.  I have embraced a hands off approach at home.  I don't worry if my daughter doesn't turn off her bedroom lights or my wife leaves the TV on.  They know I appreciate it if they do but using my way, I don't have to sweat it, get upset, or be the defacto energy Nazi.  I enjoy having all the bells and whistles too and demonstrating one can be energy aware without living like a caveman.  My real goal is to be as independent as possible.  If battery technology was a viable option then I would be off the grid completely but it is not.

I chose to implement solar and GEO as a future financial hedge against the direction I see things going.  It is a retirement strategy and hopefully it is going to reap huge dividends.  When I retire you won't see me with my thermostat at 60 and wearing my fur coat to stay warm.  No sir, I'll be living at 72 year round without worrying how I'm going to pay the bill even at 0.50 kWh.

I am not even going to address the carbon issue as I suspect we could never agree on that issue.  I will say this, absolutely none of my decisions have been based upon my carbon footprint.  I just get frustrated at otherwise well intentioned people shoving their ideas of how we should live, what we should own, how much we should make etc.  I have a mommy and a daddy and I don't need another (government) to direct my life.

BTW My home is 4400 sq ft, I have propane for cooking and a set of gas logs.  GEO provides my HVAC as well as my water heating.  I have a well for water and sand filtration for our septic. there are 3 occupants at this time. My net kWH usage for a year under 2000. I use approx 200 gal gasoline in a year.  

If you want to compare carbon footprints I will be happy to oblige.

[jlsoaz]

Hi jfpetesn:

There's another point here that occurred to me on this debate over whether, and in what ways, it might be worth paying attention to (seemingly) small energy-wasting matters:

I can't imagine spending the time to trace down a stray 30-100 watts. Then I find it is an old UPS, Computer, or TV so I am going to go out and buy a new component for $$ to replace the working old one to save me $5.00/yr?  Just doesn't make sense to me.  

I think in the 90s, there was a study of some sort that estimated the amount of money a home's worth would go up, per dollar saved in efficiency per month.   Offhand I don't remember the number, but others here might.

As a somewhat related matter, I always thought, particularly back then, that critics of solar energy overplayed their hands by insisting that all discussions must boil down to a payback equation, and perhaps not focusing enough on building valuation changes attributable to installation of solar.

Anyway, in both the case of installing solar, and in the case of installing better efficiency measures on one's home, I think as time passes, if the portions of home valuations attributable to these measures go up (on average), then those who have spent the money (and-or-time) on these matters may stand to benefit.  If the portions of home valuations attributable to these measures do not go up on average by a lot, or remain flat or go down, then maybe it's not that valuable.  Anyway, something to think about, from the economic calculation side.

With respect to the efficiency measures you have taken on your home (LED lighting, good insulation, etc.) they do seem like very good measures.  I think home efficiency measures vary somewhat with region and type of home and perhaps other variables.  I've been glad about my own replacement of lighting (though it cost a lot) but the insulation part is tougher (my home is concrete with no attic,.... it is somewhat cold in winter, but insulating it further I think would require a somewhat non-conventional approach.  (the type of home is laid out at www.terra-dome.com).

[jfpetesn]

jlsoaz:

I certainly can appreciate your points.  I installed solar last October for the reasons stated in my last post.  Honestly, it is expensive technology and I am looking at a 15-16 year payout so it is definitely a long term investment.  I made that investment without the consideration of increasing my home value.  I do think it is possible if a prospective buyer looks at energy expenditures as part of their purchase decision.  Not sure they do in todays market.  I do, but I am in the minority I think.  I look at my monies sent to utilities as dollar bills set on fire.  I have a few years left before I retire.  During retirement, I go from generating cash flow to managing expenses.  The more that I can fix my monthly expenses the better it will be for me.  In actuality, the more energy prices rise the better off I am (I signed up for hourly utility pricing so I am able to hedge another 10-15% from my solar)

Solar is very cool indeed and I love having it but as I said before it is expensive. I enjoy the fact that I am having a small energy impact and really making something out of nothing.  It is a real feel good item but again it is expensive.

As for our homes, we buy the best we can afford then we try to make them the best we can.  I was fortunate, the guy that built mine built it for himself and did a pretty good job.  I had an energy audit with blower door test and mine came out stellar.  That's not to say there are not things I wouldn't have changed if I were building one.

At the end of the day we are all in the same boat.  I like to think outside the box and I am an admitted geek for new technology.  I love home automation and tech stuff.  I too bought my first TED several years ago.  It was a TED 1000.  I used it to manage our loads during power outages on a generator.  I now have a Pro Home version and I use it to keep track of my solar and home loads and to make sure the utility is billing correctly.  Once I am sure that everything is fine with that I will probably look at reducing my total energy consumption a little.

I am waiting for my old beer fridge to quit working.  I hate to throw it out its like an old friend. My wife is a stay at home mother so it is surprising how much the plasma TV uses.

Oh well, all is good.  Keep bouncing those ideas as thinking outside the box is great.  I think we are both after the same goal just approaching it from different directions.

[DanKegel]

May as well chime in with my story.

I added solar PV to my house, sized to cover 90% of our needs,
but we were never happy with how high our electric bills were after installing solar.
Something to do with installing huge ACs and an electric hot tub after going solar;
maybe I should have thought harder about that.

We've since moved, and I'm trying to do it right this time.
First step was to replace all the incandescents with LEDs,
and two old leaky appliances with energy star ones. Worked great,
we're now Tier 2 instead of Tier 3 on our electric bill.
But the second step is harder: adding an AC without blowing the energy
budget like we did last time.  And that meant getting an energy audit
and fixing the many problems it found.

Before I fix them, though, I want to measure them, and then fix them
one at a time.  The very first thing up for fixing is the huge leaks in
our heating ducts... and the way to measure the impact of that is
to see how long the furnaces (attic and basement) have to run in the morning.

So I dug out the ol' two-MTU TED5000 (bought but never used before),
hooked it up to the furnaces, and verified it worked.
Then I thought about the experiment I wanted to run.  To make
it easy, I set our thermostats to jump from 65 degrees to 68 degrees
at 5:30AM, and wrote a script to query the TED for per-minute power history
for the current day from 5AM to 6AM, and fetch the temperature from
the nearest NOAA weather station at some point during that hour, too.
The script's just 87 lines of very crufty perl, so it's good for a demo
or for my little analysis, but isn't anything to write home about.

As the first few days of data come in, I'll try to write a decent
script to extract how long it takes the furnaces to raise the temperature
by three degrees.  (Hmm, maybe I should stagger the
furnace runtimes so they're not helping each other.)
And once I have that working well, I plan to gather data
for a couple weeks, then start plugging leaks and seeing
if my efforts show up in the data.

Wish me luck!

[jlsoaz]

jlsoaz:

I certainly can appreciate your points.  I installed solar last October for the reasons stated in my last post.  Honestly, it is expensive technology and I am looking at a 15-16 year payout so it is definitely a long term investment.  I made that investment without the consideration of increasing my home value.  I do think it is possible if a prospective buyer looks at energy expenditures as part of their purchase decision.  Not sure they do in todays market.  I do, but I am in the minority I think.  I look at my monies sent to utilities as dollar bills set on fire.  I have a few years left before I retire.  During retirement, I go from generating cash flow to managing expenses.  The more that I can fix my monthly expenses the better it will be for me.  In actuality, the more energy prices rise the better off I am (I signed up for hourly utility pricing so I am able to hedge another 10-15% from my solar)

Solar is very cool indeed and I love having it but as I said before it is expensive. I enjoy the fact that I am having a small energy impact and really making something out of nothing.  It is a real feel good item but again it is expensive.

[...]

I am not sure that improving efficiency is inexpensive, but maybe in some cases relatively so.  When I first installed my solar system, I remember the installer also recommending that I take some basic efficiency measures (installing a blanket on my furnace, replacing my fridge, etc.) and this seemed reasonable and cost-effective.

It doesn't sound to me that you were particularly set on a course of installing your solar system for the sake of quick economic payback, though there was some economic thinking involved.  In any event, I think that very few of us put money in our homes with the idea that others will inevitably fully value every feature that we would, but at the same time I think most of us do expect that if we put money into a home improvement (no matter what) that the improvement, if fairly well chosen and well-executed, will likely have some impact on improving the value of the home.

Here is one paper (just to give an idea) that gives some evidence of home value improvement corresponding to efficiency improvements:

http://www.ongrid.net/AppraisalJournalPVValue10.98.pdf

Evidence of Rational
Market Valuations for
Home Energy Efficiency
Electronically reprinted with permission from The Appraisal Journal (October 1998),
© by the Appraisal Institute, Chicago, Illinois.
[...]
According to this study, residential real estate markets assign to energy-efficient
homes an incremental value that reflects the discounted value of annual
fuel savings. The capitalization rate used by homeowners was expected to be
4%–10%, reflecting the range of after-tax mortgage interest rates during the
1990s and resulting in an incremental home value of $10 to around $25 for every
$1 reduction in annual fuel bills. Regression analysis of American Housing Survey
data confirms this hypothesis for national and metropolitan area samples,
attached and detached housing, and detached housing subsamples using a
specific fuel type as the main heating fuel.
[...]

That seems to have been nearly 20 years ago (although it's hard to say when the paper was written and when it was reprinted) but it gives at least an idea of things, if not up-to-date multipliers.  

They mention fuel types, but I'm not sure if this particular approach to things makes a distinction for reducing one's energy bills via efficiency measures or via residential solar.  I suppose it's possible that either way is neutral to this type of math formula approach, but I think a more modern study might want to look at that question of whether there's a difference (i.e.: if I reduce my monthly energy bills by $50 per month via a solar install, versus reducing them $50 per month via efficiency measures, does this make a difference?).

With respect to what interests and drives us, one of the things that drives me (I couldn't say if it's the top thing) is that I simply love efficiency.  Other drivers include low carbon interests, professional interests and patriotism.

With respect to Carbon, you mentioned something about not discussing it as it seemed unlikely you could convince me of anything.  From my point of view, I am not interested in debating AGCC with you or anyone here in this forum, but I will comment on how one's views of AGCC may affect our views on advocating efficiency:

In my view:

1.  If a person believes AGCC is nonsense, then I guess in at least some instances they may surmise that people who oppose them are trying (whether deliberately or inadvertently) to pull us back to a more primitive era.

2.  If a person believes that AGCC denialism is nonsense, then I guess in at least some instances they may surmise that people trying to get in the way of action on AGCC are (whether deliberately or inadvertently) trying to bring us back to a more primitive era.

3.  There is I guess some middle ground between believing that AGCC is nonsense or that AGCC denialism is nonsense.

[jfpetesn]

I won't say it is nonsense but I will say that I believe the scientific global temperature data has been manipulated to achieve a desired result.  I think the scientific community has sold their soles to push an agenda and sell it as fact.  I just believe that the global warming thing is just an excuse to redistribute wealth.  I'm not saying that there has not been an increase in atmospheric CO2 but I do not think it having a profound warming effect.  There is science on both sides of the issue but it appears to me that the warming enthusiasts are all in at this point and they believe their point is set in stone and they refuse to consider any alternative points of view.  In my opinion, the science is still out.  When it comes to the government pushing an agenda, usually one just has to follow the money.  The global warming issue is one way to generate tons of money through fees, tariffs, and penalties.  It takes money from developed countries and redistributes it to developing countries and drives up energy costs.  I could go on and on but i do not think the problem is as large as they lead us to believe. I don't knock those that have bought into the warming side of things but I would just suggest that those that do should really scrutinize the data, data station relocation data and the story as a whole.  Just not enough solid data for me yet as well as watching the weather suggests something different to me at this time.  Some suggest we are actually entering a historic period of global cooling and if so, the additional CO2 may come in handy to keep temps a few degrees higher in the future.

At the end of the day, people are going to use energy in a way that gives them comfort despite what anyone wants them to do.  We have all these conveniences and technological innovations and the public want and desire them.  It will be tough to put that genie back in the bottle so while the true warming enthusiasts talk a good talk, most still want and have the same technology as all of us.  They still fly, drive cars and heat their homes the same way I do.  Few have gone the direction we have and installed solar, wind etc.  Why? because all this stuff costs tons of money and all of us are stretched in the pocketbook already.  It's really simple economics and human nature.  Simple as that.  "It's a great idea for everyone else just not me." 

My beliefs are similar to yours, I believe in efficiency and not wasting resources.  I am also a patriot and very independent.  I would very much like to be totally self sufficient and I am working toward that goal.  I am truly on the fence on this and I want more data and honest discussion before I commit to either side.  Shouting down one opinion or the other does no one any good.  The real solution as always lies in the middle.

I do appreciate your side and looking for additional efficiencies.  It is a good topic for discussion for sure.

[jfpetesn]

DanKegel:

It is a process for sure, I would be interested in knowing your findings on your HVAC.  I have geothermal and I have tried to play around with setbacks.  My wife likes it cool at night so I was setting back at 22:00 to 65 degrees and then bringing it back up starting at about 03:00 slowly.  With my system if I bring it back up more than 4 degrees then it will kick in the strip heat.  I would start at 03:00 bring it up 2 degrees, another 2 degrees at 04:00 and then a final 2 degrees at 05:00.  That worked very well but I did notice that for several minutes my (I have a 2 speed compressor) compressor would go into the 2nd stage during the makeup.  This winter since it got very cold I switched to a single temp 24/7 no setback.  Many say that with heat pumps this is how you are supposed to run them but I am still not sure.  Now I see the compressor run a little longer but it does not go int the 2nd stage at all.

How did you setup that script?  That seems interesting.  I guess I could make a spread sheet to calculate the minute data between the two methods of running.  Probably something that I need to investigate a little more.  Our old house had 2 units with one in the attic.  I ended up installing new duct work in the attic and using duct mastic on each and every joint.  The duct work in the basement I didn't worry about as it was within the conditioned space.  Our duct work now is all within the conditioned space.  I have installed dampers so that I can zone my HVAC.  I bought a spyder and my load for my GEO is about 3kw when it is running winter or summer.  It is a 4 ton unit.

May I ask, how much solar did you install?  I have a 13.2kWh ground mount system with a Sunnyboy string inverter.  Works great!  I have done some projections off of known similar systems and I think I will be knocking on 20-22,000 kWh yearly production.  Do you have an SREC program?

jlsoaz:

I have the same questions about your solar install.  Do either of you have any tips or suggestions regarding your solar?  I did some research analysis and have just made the switch to an hourly pricing program with our utility.  This is my first month on the program but if my calculations are correct, I believe that the hourly pricing will add another 10-15% production efficiency to my solar system.  The reason is that most of the price increases throughout the day occur during the 9-5pm time period.  This is the time period that I am sending the most power back on the grid so they will compensate me for my solar production at the current hourly price.  This allows me to sell my solar production at a higher kWh rate say 0.05-0.09 kWh and then when I purchase at night I will purchase back at 0.025-0.035 kWh.  I think it is really going to add up.  If you have that option you might investigate it. Just like the stock market, sell high and buy low.

[DanKegel]

My old house has 8kw of solar, installed five years ago.  Plain old inverter (and some shading problems).  Over last 5 months, peak was 52.2 KW; on average, it produced 36 KWH/day, or about 14 megawatthours/year.  You can read about it here: http://kegel.com/energy/solar/retrofit1.html
No SREC in California that I know of.

I wrote the script with a text editor and the commandline perl interpreter that came with the system.  It's a work in progress.

Fun fact: my two "identical" furnaces behave differently; according to TED, the one in the attic uses 750 watts when running, the one in the basement uses 630 watts.  I get about the same readings even if I swap my two MTU's.  I wonder what's going on.  I know the downstairs ducts are much leakier.
Also, the downstairs furnace cycles off for a moment halfway through each 15 minute run (TED can see it running its igniter afterwards, which spikes consumption pretty high).  The upstairs furnace also runs for about 15 minutes, but doesn't stutter in the middle.

This is like MRIs, where you see things you didn't expect, and scratch your head about what it means...

[jfpetesn]

Could it be that the blower speeds are set differently? I know when we had an attic unit it was set up for a particular number of registers and then it was different for heat and AC.  Also, those attic units really take a beating as they are operating at temp extremes especially in the summer.  It could be duct size and run so the attic unit is working a little harder to push the air around.  I also wonder why the downstairs furnace shuts down mid cycle.  I wonder if the limit switch is kicking in (getting too hot) and allowing it to cool off before resuming.  Could be a problem or a bad limit switch. 

Our solar has been installed since mid October.  My best day was in Feb and I hit 88.5kWh.  So far I prob average about 75 kWh with sun but overall I expect 55-60 kWh/day average.  If you have a single string inverter then shaded panels take down the entire string to the lowest panel.  The newer microinverters really help with production where some of the panels are shaded.  They allow each panel to produce max power. If you have one or two shaded, they let the other non shaded panels produce max power so it makes a big difference.  If you do not have shading issues then the single string inverters work great.

If you get the script working well let me know I would like to take a look at it and give it a try.