Is there any environmental difference between showering at home vs at the gym?

If you are worried about that difference make sure you are taking a 'military' shower. Use the water to get wet then TURN IT OFF. Soap and scrub with water off then rinse clean. That will save a good deal of water and energy vs running the water the whole time.

 

I think your memory is way out of whack, as that implies a 10% thermal-to-wall-socket efficiency.

The figures I see elsewhere are for plant efficiencies of about 30% for old plants to nearly 60% for the best modern plants. Another chunk is lost between the plant and the customer, but by no means are we facing a (30%)-squared problem.

 

As I suggest, I don't remember the formula, but the point stands none the less.

Icarus

 

The ratio should be about 3:1 rather than 10:1, but it is still really poor efficiency if natural gas is available.

And from what I've gathered the average combined cycle gas power plant runs about 50% efficiency. Newer ones can do better, but that is not the average. Apply a 7.5% transmission loss, and about 90% efficiency for an electric water heater tank and you get about 42% overall. Compare this with using the natural gas for heating directly in a standard low efficiency water heater with 60% overall efficiency. It is not hard to see which is the more efficient use of the gas.

 

The point is exaggerated beyond reality.

While electric resistance water heating is not good from a system efficiency standpoint, it is not nearly as bad as you represent. And for many of us in areas where residential energy distribution was built upon a philosophy of cheap hydro powering all-electric homes, current energy rates leave absolutely no payback to having natural gas extended to our homes. Neighborhoods that were developed with gas distribution are a different situation.

At least solar hot water (evacuated tube, not PV) does have a theoretical payback time, even if it isn't within my life expectancy. I'll be keeping my eyes on electric heatpump water heating, with hopes of more economical choices before my existing electric tank reaches its service life.

 

From an environmental standpoint, I've found hockey locker room showers to be the worst. Efficiency be damned; you can die from the crud growing in hockey locker rooms.

Tom

 

I can vouch for that. Though the last place I played was really nice.

 

And here I thought the threat was getting on the ice with a bunch of large toothless men swinging long sticks.

 

Not having gas available is a whole different matter and was not the basis of comparison.

I'll be interested to see how these do. They have a lot of potential for those who must use electric.

I have the same wait and see issue with natural gas condensing storage tanks. These will increase efficiency by about 20%.

 

I can have gas if I'm willing to pay for a long trench and asphalt replacement. It kinda sorta might have made sense if it could have been combined with the water or sewer trenching. But I wasn't here then, and gas's cost advantage has shrunk badly in the time since.

But even if the connection were laid for free, the monthly account charge and franchise fee just for having an active gas meter is essentially identical to my entire (estimated) electric energy cost of the water heater. The gas itself would have to be free just to break even.

This is a case where the utility rate structures discourage having multiple energy sources. The fixed period charges would be split among fewer loads.