G-save gas-saving gadget - experience?

WestonDave

£156 for an oscillating switch (or pair of) - someone is having a laugh.

This is a nonsense - its not sensing when to turn the boiler off early - its simply randomly interrupting the electrical circuit between the thermostat and the boiler. So it might just as likely prevent the heating coming on when it needs to as it would shut it off early.

We have a digital display on our thermostat which even without G save, never sees the actual temperature running beyond the set temperature. If the latent heat effect works (and I can see the point) it must be very marginal in a modern efficient system.

Cardew

bargepole wrote: »

OK, not a newbie and nothing to do with any of the 1-off posters.

I got one of these g-save boxes, and ran a test - 1 week's meter readings without it fitted, and 1 week with it connected. Thermostat and timer controls remained unaltered during the 2 week period, 17/11/09 - 01/12/09.

During the week with g-save not in use I used 30 cubic meters of gas.

During the week with g-save connected, I used 23 cubic meters of gas.

So that's a saving of 23.3%, equivalent to 78.37 Kwh, which would have cost £2.30 on my tariff.

Ours is quite an old Baxi boiler, with hot water priority, so that means the g-save only works on the CH circuit, not the HW. But by saving a couple of quid a week during the autumn / winter months, I reckon that makes it a worthwhile purchase.

It is really frightening that you believe that this device actually saves you anything - let alone 23%.

I don't doubt that your figures are accurate, but any saving is not down to that device, but different operating conditions.

If I strap magnets(or even horse placenta!) to the fuel lines of my car it will make no difference to my mpg at a steady, say, 70mph.

However if I drop my speed to 60mph after fitting the magnets and do a comparison with the fuel consumption I got at 70mph - I will get better MPG.

Similarly this device only shows savings because you produce less heat.

bargepole

Cardew wrote: »

It is really frightening that you believe that this device actually saves you anything - let alone 23%.

I don't doubt that your figures are accurate, but any saving is not down to that device, but different operating conditions.

If I strap magnets(or even horse placenta!) to the fuel lines of my car it will make no difference to my mpg at a steady, say, 70mph.

However if I drop my speed to 60mph after fitting the magnets and do a comparison with the fuel consumption I got at 70mph - I will get better MPG.

Similarly this device only shows savings because you produce less heat.

I don't accept your argument at all - as stated in my post, the operating conditions were exactly the same for both weeks, in terms of thermostat and timer settings.

The purpose of the device is to use less gas, but to keep the house at the same temperature. This was achieved, with a saving of 7 cubic metres of gas.

It would surely be more accurate to say that I burnt less gas, because less heat was wasted.

penrhyn

But what about the weather?

daveyjp

bargepole wrote: »

I don't accept your argument at all - as stated in my post, the operating conditions were exactly the same for both weeks, in terms of thermostat and timer settings.

Please let us all know when the temperature profiles for 14 consective days were exactly the same!

greengus

daveyjp wrote: »

Please let us all know when the temperature profiles for 14 consective days were exactly the same!

You are right, the weather is not the same for 14 consecutive days. In fact, hasn't it got noticably colder in the past week - I had to scrape ice off the car this morning!!

With this in mind, surely this person should have been using more gas in the second trial. Bargepole, it was the second trial where you were using the g-save, wasn't it?

Cardew

greengus wrote: »

You are right, the weather is not the same for 14 consecutive days. In fact, hasn't it got noticably colder in the past week - I had to scrape ice off the car this morning!!

With this in mind, surely this person should have been using more gas in the second trial. Bargepole, it was the second trial where you were using the g-save, wasn't it?

You are the 5th first time poster in this thread alone who has jumped in to promote the qualities of this product.

None of you have any commercial motive of course;)

If it works then why not get the Energy Saving Trust to endorse the product, or Which to test it.

The purpose of the device is to use less gas, but to keep the house at the same temperature. This was achieved, with a saving of 7 cubic metres of gas

In these days of high energy costs, do you not think any 'device' that would save 2.3% let alone 23% would have the Government pushing it like mad.

How on earth can you keep a house at the same temperature with such a device and use less gas - have you re-invented the Laws of Physics?

Snake Oil!!!

bargepole

Cardew wrote: »

... How on earth can you keep a house at the same temperature with such a device and use less gas - have you re-invented the Laws of Physics? ...

We're obviously not going to agree on anything here, so this will be my last post on this topic - you keep reading your physics textbook, and I'll look forward to reading my lower gas bills.

greenbee

Could this is another example of the Hawthorne effect ?

Anything that makes people more conscious of their energy usage habits is a good thing - but not if it only has a short-term impact.