hopper said:
Alex said:
A mystery indeed, on par with the mystery of why an entire continent can't admit 110v is an even bigger mistake. [wink]
I'm glad for 110/120 volts. Over my 50 some years of working, I can't count how many times I've been shocked (my own stupidity/carelessness most of the time). Can only wonder what would have happened if it had been a 220/240 volt system. the 110 is much safer, although less power but not enough to cause problems.
Just a small tongue in cheek remark, not meaning to open up a discussion about the subject. It is just that we seem to keep hearing complaints about how there are two different cords in the USA, and here in 220v country we don't have that problem. And I have read about a lot more other types of problems stemming from having 110, while those problems never seem to arise in 220v countries.
As for safety, there is very little data to suggest you're actually right about that. I've been shocked myself many times by 220v and it never was the slightest problem. A 9v battery on the tongue is more irritating than any of the 220v shocks I had on the skin.
I have also tried many times to find official statistics about accidents happening with electricity in 110v and 220v countries. So far without luck. No idea why, there is a lot to find about other types of accidents and fatalities, but not about electrocutions. Makes me lean to the conclusion it is a fairly small and insignificant fraction in both 110v and 220v countries.
Everytime the 110v "safety" argument comes up, I have to scratch my head, just like when I hear Americans can't eat Kinder Surprise chocolate eggs out of "safety" concerns.