ArticleTrader.com
  

 Main Menu

  Home
  Member Login
  Forum
  Submit Article
  RSS Feeds
  Contact Us
  About

 Services

  Article Distribution
  Link Building

 Tools

  ArticleMS
  Directory Tracker

 Categories

  Automotive
  Business
  Computers
  Entertainment
  Finance
  Food
  Health
  Home and Family
  » Gardening
  » Hobbies
  » Home Improvement
  » Home Security
  » Interior Design
  » Kids
  » Parenting
  » Pets
  » Pregnancy
  Internet
  Legal
  Science
  Self Improvement
  Shopping
  Society
  Sports
  Technology
  Travel
  Writing

82 users online.



 
  » Category Sponsors
  Get Your Link Here - Limited Time Bargain at only $11/month!

Home » Home-and-family » Home-security » The Differences Between a Condensing and a Non-Condensing Wall Hung Boiler
Article Stats:
81 Views
391 Words

Get Html Code
PDF | Print View | Post to your Site

The Differences Between a Condensing and a Non-Condensing Wall Hung Boiler

Submitted by Leaftech
Tue, 26 Feb 2008

With the costs of energy constantly on the rise and with no declines in sight in the future, more and more households and companies are looking into efficient alternatives when it comes to heating the water used in buildings. One of the best alternatives to traditional hot water heaters (also known as boilers) are wall-hung units.

Wall-hung boilers all have the advantage of using less space than traditional boilers, and they are also much more energy efficient than hot water tanks. This is largely due to their smaller size; a wall-hung unit will lose much less heat and use less energy to heat the water contained within it simply because there is less space in the boiler from which the heat can be lost. In fact, where a regular hot water tank may run at up to 60% efficiency in very good cases, a wall hung boiler may run at 75-90% efficiency!

The difference between the efficiency of the wall-hung boilers is dependent upon the type of wall unit in question. There are both condensing and non-condensing boilers available. For the average person, the main difference between the two is that it is the condensing boilers that offer the most savings in terms of money, due to more efficient use of energy (they are the model that will run at 90% efficiency and up, as compared to non-condensing models at around 75%).

The reason that condensing boilers are so much more efficient is that they trap water that has been heated to the evaporation point and turn the vapour back into liquid by cooling it. Condensing boilers are able to do this because they have a larger heat exchanger than other boilers (without that improvement, the boiler would explode. The idea is to have less vapour escaping up the flue).

Of course, the problem with anything that will save you money in terms of efficiency is that, generally speaking, it will cost more than traditional methods. This is another difference between the condensing and the non-condensing boilers – condensing models will be more expensive to purchase.

Of course, most proponents of condensing boilers will quickly point out that this model will save money over the long run; this may or may not work for your household, depending on the amount of hot water you consume.

About the Author

For more information on this article or an instant water heater, visit WallhungBoilers.com.


Source: ArticleTrader.com
Creative Commons License

Comments

No comments posted.

Add Comment

Your Name:


Your Email:


Comment

Enter the code shown

Visual CAPTCHA

 Top Authors

 1 stickystebee (3095)
 2 alien82 (2756)
 3 kajuba (2386)
 4 limalan88 (2232)
 5 sverdlow (1712)
 6 juliet (1683)
 7 AnthonyF (1244)
 8 artavia.seo (1138)
 9 MarkeD (1105)
 10 isolvum (1019)
 11 cj (946)
 12 IC (935)
 13 jkhbraveheart (847)
 14 lets_j2top@ya.. (825)
 15 Osborne (802)

 Latest Forum

» top authors box
» Free Daily Ads
» Google doesn't index articles.
» Online Credit Card Application
» Cron Job: Delete _cache
» Total Views Shows As Zero

 Distribution

Article Distribution

  
  Affiliate Program 2Checkout.com, Inc. is an authorized retailer of ArticleTrader.com

0.15s