What system has shown to be a cheaper alternative to GFCIs in economic impact analyses?

What system has shown to be a cheaper alternative to GFCIs in economic impact analyses?

• A. Standard wiring practices
• B. Assured equipment grounding conductor program
• C. Use of surge protectors
• D. Installation of additional circuit breakers

Answer: (B)

The assured equipment grounding conductor program has been recognized in economic impact analyses as a more cost-effective alternative to ground fault circuit interrupters (GFCIs). This program focuses on ensuring that all electrical equipment and outlets are properly grounded, which significantly reduces the risk of electrical shock and faults. By maintaining effective grounding, the system enhances safety without the higher costs associated with GFCIs, which require more complex installation and can be more expensive to maintain. Additionally, standard wiring practices, surge protectors, and additional circuit breakers, while important for safety, do not offer the same direct cost-saving benefits in comparison to the assured equipment grounding conductor program. Each of these alternatives may serve distinct functions in electrical safety but do not provide the same level of economic advantage when analyzed for their effectiveness and cost in replacing or reducing the need for GFCIs.

The assured equipment grounding conductor program has been recognized in economic impact analyses as a more cost-effective alternative to ground fault circuit interrupters (GFCIs). This program focuses on ensuring that all electrical equipment and outlets are properly grounded, which significantly reduces the risk of electrical shock and faults. By maintaining effective grounding, the system enhances safety without the higher costs associated with GFCIs, which require more complex installation and can be more expensive to maintain.

Additionally, standard wiring practices, surge protectors, and additional circuit breakers, while important for safety, do not offer the same direct cost-saving benefits in comparison to the assured equipment grounding conductor program. Each of these alternatives may serve distinct functions in electrical safety but do not provide the same level of economic advantage when analyzed for their effectiveness and cost in replacing or reducing the need for GFCIs.