Immersion Heater Question

[DrewCarey80]

Hiya

Sorry to ask silly questions, but, I am a complete numpty when it comes to DIY. Just moved into a flat, which is is brand new and has Economy 7.

The immersion heater has 2 switches to the right of it, with no markings etc, just two lights. Both switches are on, the left switch has no light and the right switch has a light on. Am I correct in presuming that the right hand switch would be the boost button?

The landlord is not available and the manuals give no further info. One other small thing, I have felt around the tank and there is no heat loss around it and in fact the whole tank is cold to touch. Am I right in presuming therefore that as it appears to be a modern efficient immersion tank that we would be better placed leaving it on all day?

Hope someone can help.

Andy

 

[Softus]

The immersion heater has 2 switches to the right of it, with no markings etc, just two lights. Both switches are on, the left switch has no light and the right switch has a light on. Am I correct in presuming that the right hand switch would be the boost button?

How many flexible cables enter the immersion heater cap?

the whole tank is cold to touch.

Something is wrong then.

Am I right in presuming therefore that as it appears to be a modern efficient immersion tank that we would be better placed leaving it on all day?

No. You should identify the off-peak element connection/switch and leave that on all night. The other switch is likely to be for the boost element, and you would not want to use that at all unless you ran out of hot water during the day/evening.

 

[gas4you]

As well as checking the switch to the bottom immersion is on, check the E7 consumer unit for any mcb's that may be in the off position.

 

[Softus]

Bottom immersion?

 

[oilman]

Don't knock it 'til you've tried it.

 

[Softus]

What ho oilman. Happy New Year

 

[oilman]

Now, you know I'm not into sociability. Happiness comes with poverty, as long as it's not abject.

 

[Softus]

Did Socrates not postulate that, under the influence either of poverty or of wealth, workmen and their work are equally liable to degenerate?

If he was right, then the only laudible goal is that of an elegant sufficiency.

 

[swidders]

Socrates was wrong though.

 

[Softus]

Well I have his Fax number somewhere if you want to enlighten him.

 

[swidders]

"Facsimile" latin, "socrates" greek - think my explanation would get lost in the translation! His postulation assumes that wealth and poverty are opposites and that therefore one would "degenerate" to towards its opposite. But I'd argue they are the same and that you therefore have nowhere to go.

 

[Softus]

"Facsimile" latin

I got mine at Staples.

His postulation assumes that wealth and poverty are opposites

He doesn't, but even if he did it's not central to his point.

But I'd argue they are the same and that you therefore have nowhere to go.

I don't know what you mean by "the same", but the effects of each are entirely not the same, except for the effect on workmen and the degeneration of their work.

 

[swidders]

either of poverty or of wealth

Well maybe not opposites, but different (since using "either").

Material wealth = spiritual poverty and vice-versa. Hmmm??

On the other hand, socrates didn't have problems with his duel immersion heaters, so maybe he was smarter after all

 

[Softus]

Well maybe not opposites, but different (since using "either").

Material wealth = spiritual poverty and vice-versa. Hmmm??

You seem to be simply imagining that you know what he is supposed to have said on the subject of poverty and wealth.

Why?

 

[swidders]

You seem to be simply imagining that you know what he is supposed to have said on the subject of poverty and wealth

Aren't you too? How can you be sure that your original statement of his postulate isn't taken out of context, and that therefore your implied usage is not as he intended?

Must admit it's been a while since I read plato, but the gist was to use logical arguments based on agreed axioms. If you assume his meaning of poverty and wealth then his arguments will no doubt stand, but I question these definitions and can thus refute his arguments accordingly.