For the same reason I don't run premium gas in a car that doesn't need it. The added cost doesn't bring a benefit if a 20 amp circuit is all that is required.Is the branch already run? Why wouldn't you use a 10/3 with a 30 2-pole?
I think the comparison is a bit off. If you run premium gas in a car that does not need it it won't hurt the car. If you compare this to using a 30amp circuit instead of a 20amp circuit we are not talking that you are just wasting money on the materials that are not needed you are talking about using a circuit rated to protect an appliance etc that may end up damaging it or causing other serious problems. Reason is that the breaker won't trip in time before damage is done. This is a bit different than using premium gas.
The ratings etc are on the name plate for a reason.
... you are talking about using a circuit rated to protect an appliance etc that may end up damaging it or causing other serious problems. Reason is that the breaker won't trip in time before damage is done.
I get future proofing, I just spent a couple of hundred dollars putting in a 50 amp GFCI protected circuit into my garage for an electric vehicle I don't even own, yet. The breaker alone was nearly $150. We could go all kinds of directions in future proofing our homes. There are some who think that we'll be phasing out natural gas heat in favor of electric heat pumps, gas ranges with induction cooking, gas water heaters with heat pump water heaters. This may happen, and if it does, we'll all probably need 400 amp services. I'm not going to go through that expense for something that may happen long after I'm no longer the owner of this house or even alive. Back in the late 1990s or early 2000s running ethernet cable all over the house was done in the name of future proofing. Technology has moved on and now most devices, including the PC I'm typing on are connected via wifi. Would it be faster to be connected via a cable,? Probably, is it needed, no. I'm getting 60 mbs down and 48 mbs up. Which is plenty fast enough to stream anything without buffering. The TVs are all connected via wifi and we have no problem streaming to multiple sets at one time.I was going to comment the other day when you posted but didn’t and wanted to see how the rest felt.
Here is my logic I think both would work and both will be safe and I think the cost ether way spread out over the life of the home will not be that noticeable. What I would be thinking is maybe down the line this unit will meet its expiration date and the replacement might like the larger conductor and breaker for whatever reason. So I would do it now.
That's why i suggest doing whatever seems correct today. When I was a kid new homes came with 60a services controlled by 4 fuses for 110v (what they called it then) and one set of fuses for 220v for a stove. It was more than enough. Our house now built in 1870 has been upgraded to 200a.I get future proofing, I just spent a couple of hundred dollars putting in a 50 amp GFCI protected circuit into my garage for an electric vehicle I don't even own, yet. The breaker alone was nearly $150. We could go all kinds of directions in future proofing our homes. There are some who think that we'll be phasing out natural gas heat in favor of electric heat pumps, gas ranges with induction cooking, gas water heaters with heat pump water heaters. This may happen, and if it does, we'll all probably need 400 amp services. I'm not going to go through that expense for something that may happen long after I'm no longer the owner of this house or even alive. Back in the late 1990s or early 2000s running ethernet cable all over the house was done in the name of future proofing. Technology has moved on and now most devices, including the PC I'm typing on are connected via wifi. Would it be faster to be connected via a cable,? Probably, is it needed, no. I'm getting 60 mbs down and 48 mbs up. Which is plenty fast enough to stream anything without buffering. The TVs are all connected via wifi and we have no problem streaming to multiple sets at one time.
I'm getting 60 mbs down and 48 mbs up.
That's why i suggest doing whatever seems correct today. When I was a kid new homes came with 60a services controlled by 4 fuses for 110v (what they called it then) and one set of fuses for 220v for a stove. It was more than enough. Our house now built in 1870 has been upgraded to 200a.
Time moves on tech changes. Other than lighting most of the time current demands go up. When they start factoring in home heating and transportation I hope we have some pretty smart people working on that problem and not just the people pushing for it.
On your project assuming you have to buy the stuff to do the job each way what is the cost difference?
.I'm very jealous Sparky617 - I only get 25Mbs down and 4 up and it is cable no less. But I live out in the boon-docks so I guess I should be happy with what I have.
I'm in a pretty affluent suburb of Raleigh NC. I have the choice of Google Fiber, AT&T Digital (also fiber), and Spectrum Cable (Coax). I've had Spectrum (formally Time Warner Cable) for years and switched to GF earlier this year..
I'm very jealous Sparky617 - I only get 25Mbs down and 4 up and it is cable no less. But I live out in the boon-docks so I guess I should be happy with what I have.
You are correct. I’m all for efficiency in regards to all sources of fuel. If you go back 30-40 years energy was cheap and devices were nowhere as efficient as today. Go back 70-80 years and there wasn’t yet a need for all the necessities of today.Bud said Time moves on tech changes. Other than lighting most of the time current demands go up.
I'd say technology has gotten more efficient over time and actually current usage is going down. HVAC systems are much more efficient today than 20 years ago, and they were more efficient than the ones 20 years before them. Refrigerators, TVs, PCs, PC monitors, clothes washers all are more efficient today than they were 20 years ago. Devices that create heat from electricity haven't improved much over the years, other than heat pumps. Resistance heating is what it is. We all now have TVs that were unimaginable 30 years ago with amazing pictures and very low energy use compared to their tube predecessors. I won't count dishwashers in the efficiency improvement, while their energy use may have gone down, they take much longer with worse results. I replaced an old tower PC with a laptop, the amount of waste heat generated by the laptop compared to the tower is remarkable. Waste heat is energy used and wasted. Flat panel monitors have a bigger view area with a smaller foot print and use less energy than the CRTs they replaced. My electric bill has actually gone down over the past year or two, part of that may be both kids are now out of the house, but there is a certain amount that remains the same regardless of the number of people here. I'm looking forward to seeing what happens with my electric and gas bill with new HVAC systems in the house. In the south AC is a bigger expense than heating.
Enter your email address to join: