240V @ 30A is the highest on the planet. You consistently ignored current rating, despite recognizing that without the special, overengineered fused plugs, appliances would be exposed to them. Your inclusion of this is dishonest.

So your argument is that if you remove a necessary safety features the system is suddenly less safe. Well fucking shocker. That’s no different from me saying that if you used a ring breaker on a Japanese branch, it would be exposed to 30A and just as dangerous, and therefore concluding the Japanese system must be worse.

It’s a stupid hypothetical that tells you nothing about either system.

Also, at the point where a device is drawing short circuit current, EITHER breaker will trip most instantly, and whether the threshold is 30 or 20, the device is a smoking pile of burnt plastic afterwards anyway.

And again, breakers aren’t designed to protect devices, and devices aren’t designed to withstand some kind of massive fault tolerance based on the circuit they’re plugged into. No device on planet earth is designed with the concept of "it has to survive even when a 20A short circuit happens. And even if so, it would just be “short circuit” in general. Because as I’ve pointed out, a dead short will trip EVERY breaker, instantly, period. As I’ve pointed out repeatedly, 7A rated power cords are completely legal to sell for use on 20A Japanese outlets.

But if I’m wrong feel free to correct me. But specifically. I want specific and concrete measures and steps that you aledge are taken specifically to guard devices based on the fusing of the circuit they are attached too.

The claim you’re rebutting is not the claim that was made. The claim that was made was that each UK circuit has higher current than a comparable North American circuit. Which is true. A UK household circuit is at 30A, while Canadian/US/Mexican is at 15/20A. American and UK homes use roughly the same amount of total power, but the American home typically distributes that power with roughly 4 times as many, lower-current circuits.

Sure, the current on one ring is greater than that on one branch, that’s is true, I’ll concede that. I just consider it irrelevant. The total current coming in at the terminal connection though is half as much in the UK than the US. The US commonly has 100, 150 or 200Amp service panels.

The rest of the world safely uses unfused plugs.

No it doesn’t. Because you’re laboruimg under the delusion that breakers are designed to protect anything beyond the internal wiring of your walls. They don’t give a shit about anything else. That is their singular and sole purpose. Look for example at America. America has UNFUSED multi cords rated for 7A. There’s literally nothing stopping you in America from plugging a 7amp rated extension cord, into a 20A outlet, plugging in two space heater on max and a third one on low, and pull 18-19 amps through a cord rated for 7, and no fuse or breaker is going to stop you from doing that. So quite demonstratably, at minimum one part of the rest of the world very much does NOT safely use unfused plugs.

Every argument you make that requires fuses supports my contention. And no, it doesn’t. Swapping one safety features (central breakers) for a second, objectively better feature (fused plugs) isn’t invalidated by some ridiculous kindergarden bullshit of “oh but if you didn’t have those fuses it would be bad”

The code HAS those fuses, and with those fuses it is safe. Safer than a central breaker system in fact. You can’t just keep racking caveats changes and asterisks onto the UK electrical code and then laughing at how unsafe is. Every single arguement you make where you need to exclude/ignore safety features that the UK system has, is in fact an argument in favour of the system.

You’re assuming the internal resistance of a wire of sufficient gauge. An undersized wire - such as a power cord intended to be used on a 16A EU appliance - may not be capable of drawing 30A, let alone 1000, without catching fire. It may only draw 28A while it is glowing red hot. That same unfused power cable is perfectly acceptable and perfectly safe on a 16A EU circuit, but is unsafe on a UK household circuit without that special UK plug.

A power cord intended for a 16A EU appliance would be illegal to sell in the UK without an 15A fuse in the plug. Problem solved.

Again, you can’t argue the system is less safe when you keep needing to ignore safety devices to make that argument. I could just as well as say that without your indivisible branch breakers, the Japanese system is unsafe, and the UK manages to work perfectly safely without individual branch breakers. According to you, this is valid logic to demonstrate the Japanese system is worse than the UK system, and every time you mention branch circuits or branch breakers it just strengthens my point.

You’re ignoring the original point and arguing something tangential and irrelevant. The rest of the world safely uses unfused plugs. Which means that their power cables are simpler in design and construction, but necessitates that their power cable must be able to survive the full rated household current. The UK does not use this “unfused plug” design philosophy. The reason they don’t use it is because it would necessitate that their power cables be capable of surviving 30A faults, rather than the 16A in the EU.

The UK does not restrict their household supply circuits to 16A. They allow their household circuits to carry 30A. That standardization decision necessitates the fused plug that the rest of the world simply doesn’t need

I can just as easily flip that argument, about the UK safely using ring circuits with plug fuses, whilst the rest of the world needs to use branch breakers to keep their branches limited in size.

You’re literally just talking about the fact that the unique system in the UK requires unique safety features. That is itself value neutral, and adds nothing of relevance.

Not an accurate observation of my understanding at all, and not particularly relevant to the discussion. The topic of discussion is the relationship of plugs to household wiring.

Considering you were arguing that Japanese plugs need to handle LOWER current, when in reality it’s the exact opposite, they have to handle HIGHER current, I’d say it’s an accurate observation. The most common standardised all purpose plug in the UK is fused at, and rated for 13 Amps. Well below a 20Amp. Japanese circuit.

Conceded, with the caveat that the RCD/AFCI/GFCI device for the 20A circuit will be more sensitive and allow lower current to pass than the equivalent RCD/AFCI/GFCI device on the 100A circuit.

Your caveat is wrong. The baseline leakage current is affected predominantly by voltage and cable length. A 20 Amp circuit and a 100A circuit could both perfectly adequately and safely be protected by a 30mA RCD.

Conceded, and irrelevant to the issue at hand

Relevant to the issue at the time, which was you claiming the outcome of electric shock changes based purely on the amperage rating of the cable used.

I suspect that those cables actually do have a fuse in them, much like the fused plugs used on North American Christmas decorations.

So the entire core of your argument, other countries not needing fuses in cables/plugs has just gone poof then.

Yes, exactly. Which is why the unfused portions of that device have to be designed to handle at least 16A.

I’d like to a citation for the claim that appliances need to be withstand the Maximum current in a fault case. Also what “withstands” is even supposed to mean in this context.

But In my opinion, even if that’s the case, that’s a point in FAVOUR of UK plugs. You can receive literally the IDENTICAL level of safety by making the appliance 3A fault tolerant, and giving the plug a 3Amp fuse.

Isn’t the ability to make every device individually fault taulerant so much better than needing make them all fault tolerant to the max current.

It’s also far safer abroad, because you’re literally taken the fuse in the device with you. According to you, what happens when a device designed for a 16 Amp EU socket is plugged via adapter into a 20A Japanese socket. Now suddenly it has inadequate fault protection. Do the same thing with a UK socket, and it maintains the exact same level of fault tolerance it’s always had.

Agreed. I’ve repeatedly made that exact argument in support of my point.

So if you agree with all my points then what exactly is your issue with the UK ekectric code ?

It seems to me that your entire grape is based around the fact that the same safety features are achieved differently in the UK, and you never argue about those safety features being worse, you simply point out that they are necessary, and somehow that makes the system worse. Also, small current fuses are arguably safer than circuit breakers. You can’t detect a defective breaker, until it fails to actuate at excess current. A defective fuse would just be broken, and not allow a circuit to form in the first place.