Gas on constantly or on and off...?

cajef

SuzieSue wrote: »

During the day, I wear lots of layers (5 under my sweatshirt and 3 under my trousers) and I use a small fan heater for 5 or 10 minutes to warm up the room I am going to be using (I work from home). In the kitchen I turn the gas rings on for 5 minutes to warm it up. I find that the house is always at a comfortable temperature

I must be missing something here, you have central heating on you have to wear all those layers of clothes, use a small fan heater and turn gas rings on, yet you say the house is always at a comfortable temperature.


What is the point of central heating if you find it necessary to use all those to keep you at a temperature you can live comfortably in.

Cardew

SuzieSue wrote: »

Ok, but who says it should be 7 hours, why not 1 hour or 23 hours? That is my point - it depends on the individual circumstances.

Yes even given your improbable example of 1 hour off and 23 on(and you seem to be desperately changing the goal posts) it will be cheaper - albeit obviously not by much.

In that hour the temperature might only drop by, say, 1C from 20C to 19C.

So less heat will be lost during the hour when it is cooling down, and the period it takes to get up back up to 20C, than the heat that would be lost if the house had remained at 20C.

Heat lost = heat escaping from the house. It has to be replaced.

Can't you appreciate the kettle boiling analogy? If you boil a kettle for a cup of tea for yourself, you don't keep it boiling because you know someone else will want a cup of tea in 30 minutes.

SuzieSue

cajef wrote: »

I must be missing something here, you have central heating on yet your have to wear all those layers of clothes, use a small fan heater and turn gas rings on, yet you say the house is always at a comfortable temperature.


What is the point of central heating if you find it necessary to use all those to keep you at a temperature you can live comfortably in.

Yes, 16 degrees is a comfortable temperature for most active people. If I am not being active, eg working or watching tv, then I will boost the temperature with a heater for a few minutes and my rooms tend to keep that temperature for a a few hours (all day in the office because it is small and the heat generated by the computers helps as well). If I didn't have central heating, I would have to use the electric heater much more often which would probably be more expensive, although I haven't tried it.

SuzieSue

closed wrote: »

Sue, what basis do you think 24/7 would be cheaper, what leads you to this theory? If the level of insulation is the same, and the conditions are the same, how can it be cheaper to run 24/7 than turn it off when not needed, why do we have thermostats and timers, why do you turn your thermostat down at night?

As Cardew's quote from the EST says,Boilers use more power initially to heat water from cold, therefore, you need to find out how much that extra power usage is for your particular property and when the benefit of keeping the heating on constantly to reduce that inital power usage is outweighed by the cost of running the boiler constantly. It will be different for everyone.

iceicebaby

I too thought that on low 24/7 was cheaper until I did an experiment.

I left the heating on 24/7 on low and took readings at the start and end of the week

I then timed it to come off and on morning and evenings for a week (ie when I was actually at home) and again took readings at the start and end of the week.

I used LESS units the second week.

aelitaman

closed wrote: »

With all due respect to aelitaman, and yourself, the findings of individual posters are anecdotal rather then scientific, and could be explained by different environmental conditions during the test period.

Which is why I asked for other people to record their own figures?

You could be the first?

aelitaman

iceicebaby wrote: »

I too thought that on low 24/7 was cheaper until I did an experiment.

I left the heating on 24/7 on low and took readings at the start and end of the week

I then timed it to come off and on morning and evenings for a week (ie when I was actually at home) and again took readings at the start and end of the week.

I used LESS units the second week.

Can you remember what the difference was? i.e was it a large ammount or a small ammount?

Also boiler internal or in garage outhouse?

SuzieSue

Cardew wrote: »

Yes even given your improbable example of 1 hour off and 23 on(and you seem to be desperately changing the goal posts) it will be cheaper - albeit obviously not by much.

In that hour the temperature might only drop by, say, 1C from 20C to 19C.

So less heat will be lost during the hour when it is cooling down, and the period it takes to get up back up to 20C, than the heat that would be lost if the house had remained at 20C.

Heat lost = heat escaping from the house. It has to be replaced.

Can't you appreciate the kettle boiling analogy? If you boil a kettle for a cup of tea for yourself, you don't keep it boiling because you know someone else will want a cup of tea in 30 minutes.

Thank you, we agree at last! I agree with everything you have just said. You have said that it will be cheaper but not by much (is much 1p or £100?), but no-one knows because everyone's property is different and if is only cheaper by 1p, isn;t it better just ot keep it on 24/7?

cajef

SuzieSue wrote: »

Yes, 16 degrees is a comfortable temperature for most active people.

Try answering the question, if it is a comfortable temperature why do you need all those layers of clothes, fan heaters and gas rings on?

Most people that use the central heating efficiently do not need all those extras which leads me to the conclusion that as others have said you do not know what you are talking about and you are completely missing the point of how to use your heating.

aelitaman

Cardew wrote: »

My goodness! you really clutching at straws.

What he has given is a set of circumstances where he used less gas and it is perfectly understandable that might happen.

To demonstrate the point:

I am pretty sure that I could use less energy heating my house constantly to 25C in July by having the heating on 24/7, than by heating it 5 hours a day to 20C in January.

To carry out any controlled experiment, you need to exactly replicate the conditions.

Outside temperature/wind/humidity exactly the same on both days.

Temperature of inside of house/walls etc exactly the same both days, amount of water used exactly the same, doors opened for exactly the same time etc.

One thing is sure, given identical conditions there is no way that 7 hours heating to xC will cost less that 24 hours heating to xC.

You did not understand my post at all.