June, 1932] Electricity on New England Farms 41 



to the utility and results from equipment on fruit farms in general. 

 This fact, coupled with the evident need for the development of the 

 additional applications mentioned, indicates that studies on a larger 

 group of farms, particularly since fruit farming in New England is of 

 considerable proportions, would be desirable. 



Difficulty Experienced in Water Heating. 



The circumstances surrounding the use of electric water heaters are 

 worthy of mention since they emphasize two factors which are of great 

 importance in the development of loads on farms: namely, (1) proper 

 and careful installation, and (2) satisfaction and economy in use. 



The heaters selected in these two cases were of a 30 gallon tank type 

 of high quality, built by reliable manufacturers and of proven merit. 

 During the ten months of use no difficulty of any kind was experienced 

 with the heater equipment itself. The use of this device on two farms 

 proved a positive failure due to faulty installation which resulted in 

 abnormally high current consumption and corresponding costs. (It 

 would be well to note here that the side arm booster type proved de- 

 sirable and practical on two farms.) 



The logical location for the heater was recognized as in the kitchen 

 on Farm No. 1. This, however, was small, compact and offered no 

 easy opportunity for placement. Since water drawing at this point 

 is characterized by frequent short openings of the faucet, it would mean 

 that unless the run of pipe were short there would be much wastage 

 and lukewarm water delivered. The bathroom, however, was large 

 and roomy with plenty of space for the heater. The mistake of select- 

 ing this location rather than in making the extra effort to provide room 

 in the kitchen is evident in the results obtained. During the last six 

 months of 1926, the heater averaged 191 kw.-hrs. per month, making 

 an average bill of about $10.50 per month. In 1927 the average was 

 227 kw.-hrs. at $11.00 per month, with a maximum in June (planting 

 season) of 407 kw.-hrs. at $18.30. 



While the cost of operation of the electric heater was easily calcu- 

 lated and the cost of the coal method was more obscure ( due to bulk buy- 

 ing of coal for all purposes) it was apparent to the operator that the 

 cost of electric operation was excessive. Later checks of coal-heating 

 units revealed the cost for coal to be more than this farmer expected, 

 but still considerably under those experienced with the electric unit. 



On Farm No. 6 a corner of a stairway would have placed the heater 

 midway between the bathroom and kitchen sink with short direct runs 

 to both points. This was discarded since it would partially block the 

 stairway. No satisfactory location could be used in the kitchen or 

 adjoining rooms. The only remaining possibility was the basement. 

 This was under the main part of the house, and to reach the kitchen 

 and bath the hot water had to traverse long runs of pipe in a cold, un- 

 excavated foundation under the latter. 



In operation these conditions developed very unsatisfactory results. 

 While the heater tank was continually full of hot water, the pipe lines 

 leading to the delivery faucets were filled with a large volume of cold 

 water, so that in order to draw warm water the faucets had to be held 



