Which Is Cheaper to heat water

dyrniboy

Hi, Forgive me if this has already been covered ,but, Is it cheaper to just fill the kettle with the right amount of water for the cuppa/s needed each time or is it cheaper to fill the kettle first thing then boill and fill a flask and then just put the right amount in the kettle for the next cuppa/s ?. Would there be a market for a super insulated water container situated say underneath the draining board that could be heated using off peak electricity and then topped up to boiling when needed for cuppas etc ? . All thoughts welcome.


John

Poppycat

Personnel I woudl just heat up enough water for the job rather than store hot water in a flask.

Cardew

I think we need to get costs in perspective here.

To boil a enough water for a couple of cups of water costs a small fraction of one penny at daytime electricity rates.

Why do you think it is any cheaper to boil enough for say 8 cups and put it in a flask? It will actually cost more money, although the sums involved are tiny - fractions of a penny.

To produce a 'super insulated' device to run on off-peak would simply never be a money saving idea. Besides storing water, letting it cool and continually reheating water for consumption surely must have risks on health grounds?

Ken68

Putting the dregs (what a word) of the kettle into a flask for use later is economic.
Always understood that you need fresh oxygenated water to make tea.