# Low domestic voltage inefficiency cost

Since lower voltage means proportionally higher current for a given power, and higher current means more impedance, presumably having a lower voltage at the outlet means transmission power losses are greater than if a used a higher voltage.

How much more energy is lost per year due to the USA using 110V than if it used Europe's 220V? What is the dollar cost?

Assume the USA consumes 5 billion MWh per year, and 1 MWh costs $US0.20 to produce so total current (no pun intended) cost is$US1B p.a.

• "the USA using 110V" Appliances use 110V. Houses are supplied 220V regardless. – Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams Dec 23 '16 at 9:38
• @IgnacioVazquez-Abrams OK. So loss is over wiring within the house. – Bohemian Dec 23 '16 at 9:40
• The USA has a lower voltage in the home circuits, but the power is transmitted at higher voltage across the large distances. Look up the US nation grid on google and you'll see the power is transmitted at 110kV and upwards. Within a house, the power you're looking at is extremely low. However, in the rest of the world, electric cookers and hobs are a lot more common than in the US (apparently), due the higher power available at the higher voltage. – Puffafish Dec 23 '16 at 9:43
• @IgnacioVazquez-Abrams: Usually "using 110V" is referred to the voltage of one phase to GND. If you want to compare the often two phases of center tapped 220V that are often supplied to houses to the common three phase installations in lots of parts of europe you could say those housholds are supplied with 400V, which doesn't help for the thing in question which is one nominal mains voltage appliance and the current consumption for a given power. – PlasmaHH Dec 23 '16 at 9:45
• Assuming the US house load is split evenly across both 110V phases, there will be very little difference. – Brian Drummond Dec 23 '16 at 10:19