City water network creates parallel neutrals (parallel conductors)

[jim dungar]

How many dairies are on shared utility transformers? I would of think most have only one secondary side neutral.
How many dairies are serviced by a metallic municipal water system?
How many dairies have had multiple buildings added and service upgrades over many decades by many people who wired the way 'grandpa' taught them, often with little regard to maintaining neutral and grounding conductor integrity and separation?

 

[EMFExplorer]

The big question is: How many fires are prevented every year by having a copper water supply across a grid of many structures?
There is a perfect example of this and that is called Honolulu, Hawaii. You cannot get service from our power company unless you have a connection to a copper water pipe and then inspection demanda all the usual requirments for that pipe based on section 250 of the NEC.

By having this grid of "parallel path " for the service neutral conductor" any time an overhead neutral service drop corrodes away , that dwelling can rely (not safely however) on its backup return on the water pipes via the close by neighbor's service drops via their neutral bond connection at the service disconnect. Without this system I feel there would be quite a few more structural fires than the present situation , but once every 5 years or so there is an incidedent of electrical shock for plumbers who open the pipe without any jumper .

If we prevent x fires but cause 10000x health issues including cancer, I think the latter is more of a problem. Contact current from the earth and the magnetic fields from high flow on parallel paths cause a lot more death than fires ever would. I agree we should protect against fires, and I'm saying we can do both.

Main breakers could have a voltage detect function - or utility meters - and shut off when there is a fault. GFI main is another option. Another option yet is a device that connects to the water pipe on the supply side of an insulator/break and only clamps on when there is a fault and there is a voltage threshold.

Just like neutrals need to be derated on commercial buildings sometimes, they also need to be derated on utility lines. The neutrals should be 2.5x the size of the phase lines to accommodate for today's non-linear loads. This will get current off the earth - major problem for animals including us. For all we know it could even affect plants and microbes, too, but I don't have information on that. No doubt it has some effect, but I don't have details. For animals including us it causes metabolic issues, lowers immune system, causes cancers and inflammation, joint and heart and neurological issues and infections among others.

Then for buildings we need to eliminate the parallel paths except for ground rods/ufer, and have a way to detect a broken neutral. Just as houses with poly pipe are perfectly safe, a house with a copper pipe that is insulated so that only the internal copper piping (if any) is bonded but the external supply is not...a house like this is just as safe. There is no reasonable or logical explanation otherwise. I haven't seen any data showing houses with poly pipes go up in flames because they don't have a metal water pipe at a higher rate than houses that do have metal service.

I realize this is a change, and as humans we are reluctant to change. I also realize there is apprehension about safety. But I am appealing to reason based on the facts that we are not supposed to put current on things other than their intended conductors, that houses with plastic pipes are commonplace and just as safe, and there are proven problems and hazards of putting current onto pipes/earth. So the sooner this is fixed the better off everyone will be. It is the right way to do it, the proper way, and it is advancing good practices.

 

[EMFExplorer]

How many dairies are on shared utility transformers? I would of think most have only one secondary side neutral.
How many dairies are serviced by a metallic municipal water system?
How many dairies have had multiple buildings added and service upgrades over many decades by many people who wired the way 'grandpa' taught them, often with little regard to maintaining neutral and grounding conductor integrity and separation?

You are right that problems arise from onsite wiring issues. Absolutely this is true. But it is also true that problems arise from the utility. Even Amish farmers without electrical service have suffered from these issues. Obviously we can separate out what is onsite and what is utility/neighbors by shutting things down. Thank you for bringing this up, because it's a very real issue. Having neutral-ground bonds other than the one at the main service disconnect would be an example of on-site wiring issues that will subject the animals to "stray" (this is really a terrible term) current.

 

[electrofelon]

The big question is: How many fires are prevented every year by having a copper water supply across a grid of many structures?
There is a perfect example of this and that is called Honolulu, Hawaii. You cannot get service from our power company unless you have a connection to a copper water pipe and then inspection demanda all the usual requirments for that pipe based on section 250 of the NEC.

By having this grid of "parallel path " for the service neutral conductor" any time an overhead neutral service drop corrodes away , that dwelling can rely (not safely however) on its backup return on the water pipes via the close by neighbor's service drops via their neutral bond connection at the service disconnect. Without this system I feel there would be quite a few more structural fires than the present situation , but once every 5 years or so there is an incidedent of electrical shock for plumbers who open the pipe without any jumper .

I don't know man, I don't think I buy that - at all. I don't think counting on and having a metal water pipe as a back up neutral wire is a good idea. I'd rather have some voltage fluctuations and have them get noticed and the problem fixed than a water pipe carrying full neutral current for years until a plumber gets shocked or killed one day, then you have an open neutral anyway once the pipe is disconnected . We didn't seem to gain much there

 

[EMFExplorer]

I have just not seen any case studies suggesting that the issue is just step potential across the earth. Everything I have seen is simply contact between something connected to the electrical system bonding and grounding system and the earth.

OK, but take the simplest case of a single service disconnect, where the EGC system (including bonded parts), the GEC from the GES, and the service neutral come together in a single point, with no other connections elsewhere. And suppose the GES is spatially compact so all the earth connection(s) are at the same potential.

Then if the primary neutral is at an elevated potential from the earth at the GES, you certainly will have current flowing from the GES along the GEC and the service neutral to that primary neutral. But the EGC system and the GES (earth) are separated only by that GEC, and they will have a voltage difference only equal to the voltage drop from that current on the GEC. E.g. if the primary neutral is say 6V above GES/earth, and the service neutral is 90' while the GEC is 10' of the same conductor type and size as the service neutral, the EGC to earth/GES voltage will be 6V * 10'/100' = 0.6V.

So how sensitive are livestock to small voltage differences like that? What's the acceptable threshold?

Of course, the voltage divider of GEC/service neutral may be more balanced than my example. And much more complicated topologies are likely to be common, e.g. where multiple points along the EGC system are in fact earthed, putting current from a primary neutral elevated above earth on the EGC system itself.


Seems like if there's a potential difference between two earthed points (two different points on the MGN, when the primary neutral is carrying current), there must be a voltage gradient through the earth. But maybe where those points are far apart, the voltage gradient at the surface of the earth is negligible, other than in the vicinity of the earth electrodes?

Cheers, Wayne

Unfortunately it is not as easy as measuring voltage. Frequency and duration of exposure need also be measured. Spikes need to be measured since sharp rise/falls have an enormous effect. Plancks law - energy is proportionate to frequency. The step potential can be most of their exposure. Check out Stetzer, Graham, Milham, Havas, Hillman for peer reviewed published papers on this issue. It is very interesting stuff.

Yes we can acutely electrocute animals, but we can also chronically electrocute them. Farmers have learned to try to setup equipotential planes for feeding/watering/milking, but many still do not know how and the exposure to step potential is still the main problem. Particularly certain frequencies cause the serious problems. VFDs are probably the worst sources, then SMPSs and inverters and such.

 

[mtnelect]

If you can't see it, feel it, know it ... What's to worry about !

 

[mtnelect]

But, if it interferes with your world, then look out.

 

[EMFExplorer]

I don't know man, I don't think I buy that - at all. I don't think counting on and having a metal water pipe as a back up neutral wire is a good idea. I'd rather have some voltage fluctuations and have them get noticed and the problem fixed than a water pipe carrying full neutral current for years until a plumber gets shocked or killed one day, then you have an open neutral anyway once the pipe is disconnected . We didn't seem to gain much there

Agreed. It's sloppy to have a 2nd neutral that is used 24/7/365 "just in case" that's not even an electrical cable nor intended for that purpose. We don't allow this for anything else. We don't allow parallel conductors except in very specific circumstances and they are still electrical cables, taking the same path, same size, same length, etc. We don't just say "yeah that metal thing over there will work"

I've seen houses with ground rods lose their neutral. The rod(s) definitely help to stabilize it. The problem was noticeable. I told the occupants to leave immediately and I called the utility who came and fixed it right away. This is preferred to having the current take "that metal pipe" indefinitely. Neighborhoods with metal pipes are nasty with magnetic fields. Neighborhoods with plastic pipes are way better.

 

[macmikeman]

Agreed. It's sloppy to have a 2nd neutral that is used 24/7/365 "just in case" that's not even an electrical cable nor intended for that purpose. We don't allow this for anything else. We don't allow parallel conductors except in very specific circumstances and they are still electrical cables, taking the same path, same size, same length, etc. We don't just say "yeah that metal thing over there will work"

I've seen houses with ground rods lose their neutral. The rod(s) definitely help to stabilize it. The problem was noticeable. I told the occupants to leave immediately and I called the utility who came and fixed it right away. This is preferred to having the current take "that metal pipe" indefinitely. Neighborhoods with metal pipes are nasty with magnetic fields. Neighborhoods with plastic pipes are way better.

You sure about that ? I say this because there are pretty regular articles that turn up stating that people in Honolulu are the heatliest people in the nation, regardless of their spelling problems..........

 

[suemarkp]

Having neutral-ground bonds other than the one at the main service disconnect would be an example of on-site wiring issues that will subject the animals to "stray" (this is really a terrible term) current.

This was allowed prior to 2008 for feeders to separate buildings. It also happens when multiple buildings get their service from the same transformer, even if the primary neutral is isolated. Neighborhoods are going to have this problem unless the public wants to pay more for infrastructure such that every building or house has its own transformer.

I think having the utility isolate the primary neutral from the secondary neutral sounds like a good idea. Not sure why they don't do this unless they want a ground electrode at the pole for both primary and secondary neutrals. To me, the secondary electrode should not be needed at the transformer since there is a ground electrode at the building being served. This will make the loose neutral problem worse, but hey the NEC is really pushing GFCIs so they could just mandate one for the main breaker now too.

Isolating the plumbing is also a good idea. Every house I have had used a poly water pipe from the street. It is the old cities based on metal water distribution where this is a problem. Could be retrofitted away, but it will take time. It would help though if the code pushed or forced a non metallic section when pipes are upgraded or repaired. Heck, it seem like some cities still have lead pipes which seems like a much bigger problem.

Finally, it is good to remember why we have the system we do (MGN), and the bad things that happened long ago to drive what we have today. Mandating an electrical distribution change could have some unintended consequences making things that are rarely a problem come into the forefront.

 

[GoldDigger]

I have just not seen any case studies suggesting that the issue is just step potential across the earth. Everything I have seen is simply contact between something connected to the electrical system bonding and grounding system and the earth.

A problem commonly cited when there is NEV is that the concrete floors of the various dairy buildings are effectively connected to the GES (as in Ufer) while the earth outside the building is closer to remote earth potential. This leads to a very large step potential when entering the building.
The commonly used solution is to construct a "ground ramp" in which an equipotential grid connected to the GESs is buried around the entrances. The grid is near the surface at the edge of the concrete and gets progressively deeper over 10-20 feet moving away from the building. This spreads out the potential difference between dirt and concrete over the length of the ramp, reducing the step potential to a tolerable level.

 

[garbo]

A number of us have been bringing this issue to light for some time. When a home or other building is connected to city water via copper water supply pipe, and the electrical service is bonded to this pipe, the pipe becomes a secondary neutral current-carrying conductor. Rather than just be present in the temporary event of a fault, it is actually a current-carrying conductor that is operating 24/7/365.

It is my opinion this is very inappropriate and actually violates sections of the NEC. Yet it is also required. I think the code should be updated, and it should be standard practice to electrically isolate the city water network and only use ground rods or other electrodes. When we interconnect all buildings via the water, we create countless paths for circuit current to take that are NOT along the appropriate path - the intended circuit current-carrying conductors - wherein the current should be confined. Using pipes for carrying circuit current should be prohibited.

I have questioned this in a previous post. While doing residential service upgrades I took ampere reading on both copper water services & steel gas pipe. Always measured at least a 0.15 to 0.25 amps on the copper water service even when the meter was pulled &/or main breaker off. The distribution. Transformer that feeds my house is mounted on a pole that has three phase ( 3 wires ) but cheap Exelon only runs one high voltage wire to feed the primary and connect the secondary center tap ( grounded conductor or neutral ) to the other side of primary and of course a ground to ground rod at bottom of pole. Steel gas pipes stared leaking gas before so hones were 10 years old that might be caused by current flowing though it 24/7. Just because utility companies do not have to follow the NEC they should be made to provide safe working systems.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Agreed. It's sloppy to have a 2nd neutral that is used 24/7/365 "just in case" that's not even an electrical cable nor intended for that purpose. We don't allow this for anything else. We don't allow parallel conductors except in very specific circumstances and they are still electrical cables, taking the same path, same size, same length, etc. We don't just say "yeah that metal thing over there will work"

I've seen houses with ground rods lose their neutral. The rod(s) definitely help to stabilize it. The problem was noticeable. I told the occupants to leave immediately and I called the utility who came and fixed it right away. This is preferred to having the current take "that metal pipe" indefinitely. Neighborhoods with metal pipes are nasty with magnetic fields. Neighborhoods with plastic pipes are way better.

That would be very rare around me...the resistance of a couple driven rods is typically much to high to do anything with an open neutral issue. Its only function is for lighting and accidental contact with a higher voltage system

 

[don_resqcapt19]

I have questioned this in a previous post. While doing residential service upgrades I took ampere reading on both copper water services & steel gas pipe. Always measured at least a 0.15 to 0.25 amps on the copper water service even when the meter was pulled &/or main breaker off. The distribution. Transformer that feeds my house is mounted on a pole that has three phase ( 3 wires ) but cheap Exelon only runs one high voltage wire to feed the primary and connect the secondary center tap ( grounded conductor or neutral ) to the other side of primary and of course a ground to ground rod at bottom of pole. Steel gas pipes stared leaking gas before so hones were 10 years old that might be caused by current flowing though it 24/7. Just because utility companies do not have to follow the NEC they should be made to provide safe working systems.

If you take the time to trace out all of the conductors, you will find that they are using a common conductor as both the primary and secondary neutral. At some point you will find the secondary neutral connected to the primary neutral of the distribution system.

They are not using the ground rod as the primary neutral. If they used the ground rod, that would be a Single Wire Earth Return, something that is very very rare in the US, and is never used anywhere except very very remote areas.

Around here, it would be very rare to see current on the underground metal gas piping system because the gas utility has been using electrically isolating connections on the line side of the meter for decades.

 

[jaggedben]

That would be very rare around me...the resistance of a couple driven rods is typically much to high to do anything with an open neutral issue. Its only function is for lighting and accidental contact with a higher voltage system

I agree, in the couple instances of open utility neutrals I've seen the rods did nothing. I fact in one case IIRC the metal water pipe presumed to be connected to a metal distribution network didn't do enough.

 

[EMFExplorer]

In that one case of the open neutral, I measured more than 1 amp on a ground rod. I shut everything down and didn't do further testing at the risk of frying things and having a fire start, of course. But I did snag that measurement on rod and was pretty amazed that so much current could run through the soil. Good, moist, compacted soil can provide good connections to the rod though. There are so many parallel connections in the earth that a lot of current can run. Tapping into it is the hard part, but the parallel paths are there once you do tap in. Of course we should NOT be using the earth as a conductor, either, and should be using intended cables only. While some current on the earth is inevitable in our multi-grounded system, it can be limited through good and proper practices.

Most important: run much larger neutrals or add another line (5-wire system) as a parallel neutral. Ensure all neutral connections are permanent and resistant to damage/corrosion/break from moisture and vibration and other movement over time. Use electronic devices to isolate, identify/clear faults, and add impedance where possible to improper earth/pipes/etc paths, thereby forcing current back on the correct path. Don't create parallel conductors that take a different physical path - this splits current and causes magnetic fields, the transformer effect, health risk, induced current, etc.

We can get there and keep improving. This is a great discussion. I'm very thankful for it.

Here is a petition to change NEC/plumbing codes to end the issue of using the water pipe/sewer pipe as a low-impedance parallel conductor.

Petition Change National Electric Code and Plumbing Code to End Using Water Pipes as Electrical Conductors

Change National Electric Code and Plumbing Code to End Using Water Pipes as Electrical Conductors

www.ipetitions.com

If anyone here likes the wording of the petition enough to be willing to publicly sign it, let me know. I'd be happy to list your name and company as well. Thanks for your support!

 

[don_resqcapt19]

In that one case of the open neutral, I measured more than 1 amp on a ground rod. I shut everything down and didn't do further testing at the risk of frying things and having a fire start, of course. But I did snag that measurement on rod and was pretty amazed that so much current could run through the soil. Good, moist, compacted soil can provide good connections to the rod though. There are so many parallel connections in the earth that a lot of current can run. Tapping into it is the hard part, but the parallel paths are there once you do tap in. Of course we should NOT be using the earth as a conductor, either, and should be using intended cables only. While some current on the earth is inevitable in our multi-grounded system, it can be limited through good and proper practices.

Most important: run much larger neutrals or add another line (5-wire system) as a parallel neutral. Ensure all neutral connections are permanent and resistant to damage/corrosion/break from moisture and vibration and other movement over time. Use electronic devices to isolate, identify/clear faults, and add impedance where possible to improper earth/pipes/etc paths, thereby forcing current back on the correct path. Don't create parallel conductors that take a different physical path - this splits current and causes magnetic fields, the transformer effect, health risk, induced current, etc.

We can get there and keep improving. This is a great discussion. I'm very thankful for it.

Here is a petition to change NEC/plumbing codes to end the issue of using the water pipe/sewer pipe as a low-impedance parallel conductor.

Petition Change National Electric Code and Plumbing Code to End Using Water Pipes as Electrical Conductors

Change National Electric Code and Plumbing Code to End Using Water Pipes as Electrical Conductors

www.ipetitions.com

If anyone here likes the wording of the petition enough to be willing to publicly sign it, let me know. I'd be happy to list your name and company as well. Thanks for your support!

A petition would have no effect on the NEC...that is just not how code changes are made.

They are made when a Public Input is made to make a change in the code is submitted. The Code Making Panel will act on the Public Input, and then the First Draft Report is published and anyone can comment on the action that was taken by the CMP. There are cases where the public comments have reversed the original panel action.

The submission of PIs for changes in the 2026 code closed some time ago. The First Draft Report is scheduled to be published on July 10th, and there will be about 6 weeks for the submission of Public Comments.

The was a resolved (rejected) PI #2360 that would have removed the requirement to use a metal underground water pipe as a grounding electrode. It will be possible to submit comments, in the comment period, in an effort to get CMP 5 to change their minds on this issue. Since this was a resolved PI, it will take some work to find the PI to make a comment.
You might be able to submit your petition as a Public Comment, but not sure if that is possible.

 

[rambojoe]

I just had to check out the website..
I think a great product would be emf floor mat and seat covers for electric vehicles.

 

[ActionDave]

....Most important: run much larger neutrals or add another line (5-wire system) as a parallel neutral.

That would accomplish nothing and demonstrates that you don't understand neutral currents as well as you think you do.

 

[LarryFine]

In that one case of the open neutral, I measured more than 1 amp on a ground rod.
But I did snag that measurement on rod and was pretty amazed that so much current could run through the soil.

That doesn't seem very high to me.

Good, moist, compacted soil can provide good connections to the rod though. There are so many parallel connections in the earth that a lot of current can run. Tapping into it is the hard part, but the parallel paths are there once you do tap in.

It's known that earth is a poor conductor in the micro sense, but a great one in the macro sense.

Of course we should NOT be using the earth as a conductor, either, and should be using intended cables only. While some current on the earth is inevitable in our multi-grounded system, it can be limited through good and proper practices.

Don't we strive for that now?

Most important: run much larger neutrals or add another line (5-wire system) as a parallel neutral.

That seems lie very expensive overkill for relatively little gain.

Ensure all neutral connections are permanent and resistant to damage/corrosion/break from moisture and vibration and other movement over time.

Don't we strive for that now, too?

Use electronic devices to isolate, identify/clear faults, and add impedance where possible to improper earth/pipes/etc paths, thereby forcing current back on the correct path.

You're under the impression that eliminating parallel neutral-current pathways will somehow improve the conductivity of the intended pathway? How does that work?

Don't create parallel conductors that take a different physical path - this splits current and causes magnetic fields, the transformer effect, health risk, induced current, etc.

Where are these catastrophic events occurring?

If anyone here likes the wording of the petition enough to be willing to publicly sign it, let me know. I'd be happy to list your name and company as well. Thanks for your support!

I haven't looked it over yet, but I think eliminating electrodes will cause more hazards than it may eliminate.