No announcement yet.

Electric Saver 1200 , energy saver scam

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Electric Saver 1200 , energy saver scam

    Was asked about this at work . Looked it up looks like another scam ..

    From their site:

    Motors in your home (such as your Central Air Conditioner, Heat Pump or Pool Pump) are currently wasting energy. This means you are already paying the power company more of your hard earned dollars than you need to EVERY month! You can put a stop to this today.

    By capturing and recycling (otherwise lost energy/watts) and releasing it back to your motor when needed, you can dramatically lower your energy bills. This recycling process reduces the amount of heat on the wires and the motors in your home. Reducing this heat (kilowatts) will lower your electricity bill and lengthen the life of the motors in your home.

    And no we aren’t talking about eliminating “power factor penalties” for homeowners because homeowners aren’t given power factor penalties and are only billed for their usage. We are talking about making the motors and appliances in your home more efficient. By installing a new energy efficient refrigerator in your home, you use less energy. The ONLY way for your power company to tell whether you have an old refrigerator or a new one is by it’s usage. By making your home more energy efficient (by lowering the actual kilowatts the motors/appliances in your home or business uses), you are billed less, it’s as simple as that.
    The installation instructions are a hoot:

    Still sounds scammy to me.
    Master Electrician
    Electrical Contractor
    Richmond, VA


      No hot links allowed is what I get.


        Reload/refresh the page.


          191201-0939 EST

          It is a scam, snake oil salesman. Why do electricians fall for this? Do some analysis and experiments.

          Some of the statements are true, but fundamentally the claim that there is a large reduction in the electric bill is false, and a fraud.

          A number of years ago there was a "fire sale" on some of these power savers. So I bought one to have a real device to confront anyone that my experiment was not with a real product. I did not need more capacitors, but it is in a nice package. Convenient for demonstration.

          In the video showing their experiment it appears that they used Kill-A-Watt meters. I might point out that the Kill-A-Watt EZ is a rather good instrument, except for manufacturing quality.

          In the video experiment they had one meter at the input to a long cable, claimed to be about 40 ft, and another at the cable output where both the unloaded motor, and power saver were located. What is the resistance of the wire? Not mentioned. In their experiment without the power saver it was stated the power input at the motor input was 151 W and the input to the cable 172 W. That is 21 W power loss in the cable. A 100 ft loop resistance of 0.25 ohms would be about what to expect for #14 copper wire. It takes about 9.2 A at 0.25 ohms to dissipate 21 W. Likely a high current for the motor in the video.

          It was never stated what the input power was with the power saver connected. I believe I read 162 W.

          If we assume unloaded motor current is 5 A, more likely for the motor shown, then for 21 W dissipation the wire resistance needs to be 0.84 ohms. Closer to a #18 wire at a 100 ft loop.

          Failure to define all parameters is a major problem.

          Another problem with the experiment is that the power saver is at the motor, not at the main panel where they would have you install the power saver.

          Results of my experiments with a cheap 1/3 HP induction motor. Montgomery Ward from possibly the late 1940s with no external mechanical load..

          Instrument a Kill-A-Watt EZ. Motor is above, the power saver is a KVAR POWER SAVING unit, capacitance about 2.6 A at 123 V, Xc = 47.3 ohms, C = 55 mfd.

          No KVAR ----- 122.2 V, 5.18 A, 163 W, 639 VA, 0.25 PF
          With KVAR --- 122.3 V, 2.28 A, 163 W, 274 VA, 0.58 PF

          If I had 100 ft loop of #14 copper my resistance would be about 0.25 ohms. Motor alone wire power loss is about 5.16*5.16*0.25 = 6.6 W, with PFCC at motor 2.28*2.28*0.25 = 1.3 W. But their normal installation of the PFCC is at the main panel. Thus, no saving. The resistance from the main panel to the meter is usually very low, short distance and large wire, not much power loss.

          If you can get a PFCC box cheap enough, then it may be useful for its transient limiter, and its filtering of some noise. But it will have nil effect on your bill.

          One local builder was charging ignorant customers about $1800 for this device included in their home.



            Originally posted by gar View Post

            Some of the statements are true, but fundamentally the claim that there is a large reduction in the electric bill is false, and a fraud.
            Oldest trick in the "Book of Scammers"; little kernels of truth wrapped around the fraudulent claims.

            These "energy saver" scams have had waves of proliferation, followed by getting busted and discredited, followed by resurgence once the short memory spans time out.
            Repeat ad nauseum.

            __________________________________________________ ____________________________
            Many people are shocked when they discover I am not a good electrician...

            I'm in California, ergo I am still stuck on the 2014 NEC... We'll get around to the 2017 code in around 2021.