life long Q to keep the the heating on or not

deano72_2

its probably been debated many of time on here.is it cheaper to keep the heating on all day (on a low setting)or use the timed method.i spect there are lots of factors eg..how well is your house insulated/double glazed ect/dtactched so on & sofor

macman

deano72 wrote: »

its probably been debated many of time on here.is it cheaper to keep the heating on all day (on a low setting)or use the timed method.i spect there are lots of factors eg..how well is your house insulated/double glazed ect/dtactched so on & sofor

Yes it has.
No it's not.
Unless your house has zero heat loss.

Cardew

As stated above this question, and variations, has been asked many many times.

It doesn't need debating - the longer you have your CH off, the less it will cost.

The suplementary question is then 'what if I have it on 24/7 at a low setting'.

Well if you have it set to 10C on permanantly, it will no doubt be cheaper than having it on at 28C for 11 hours twice a day!!!!

i.e. it is a question nobody can answer.

It is like asking is it quicker to drive from London to Glasgow at a slow steady speed, or flat out stopping from time to time.!!!!

macman

And (strange though it may seem), if you leave it on 'low' 24/7, you will be cold 24/7.

suki1964

macman wrote: »

And (strange though it may seem), if you leave it on 'low' 24/7, you will be cold 24/7.

Cold and broke

When my parents came to live with us, that first winter they had the heating on all day -7.30 - 11.30 - at a lowish heat ( for them) but then we had to boost it every night around 6.30 because then it started to feel cold when the temps dropped outside

1200 ltrs of oil gone in less then six weeks :eek:

Now it comes on for timed periods of the day - around 6 hours in total and the house is nice and warm and the oil lasts me the winter

Pincher

If it's a long term question, then the debate should be is heat a luxury that poor people cannot afford all winter.

This year, you can afford 6 hours a day, next year 5 hours.
Will people steal your floorboards for firewood when you go away for Christmas? Has this happened in Eastern Europe already?

deano72_2

was speaking to mate yesterday who lives in prague (new build) hes a tight !!!! so for a couple of days he done his own test.test 1 heating set low constantly for 2 days.. test 2,yep you guessed it timed twice aday for 2days..he checked the gas usage on both test & test 1 he used less gas..we had a debate but his scientific test proved he was rite that its cheaper to keep the heating on constant at a low temp !!

macman

That test is not remotely 'scientific'. The most basic observation of the laws of physics will show you that it cannot possibly be cheaper to leave it on.
But if you want to believe otherwise, please feel free to do so-just don't come back complaining about your gas bill at the end of the winter...

Meatballs

Cardew wrote: »

i.e. it is a question nobody can answer.

It is like asking is it quicker to drive from London to Glasgow at a slow steady speed, or flat out stopping from time to time.!!!!

I can answer, it's cheaper to go slow and steady when driving...

I don't think the change in efficiency of a boiler on low, compared to high, compares to the decrease in car efficiency when accelerating sharply and braking lots though.

deano72_2

macman wrote: »

That test is not remotely 'scientific'. The most basic observation of the laws of physics will show you that it cannot possibly be cheaper to leave it on.
But if you want to believe otherwise, please feel free to do so-just don't come back complaining about your gas bill at the end of the winter...

i know its not scientific mate,i was taking the piz$z really...also thats why we had a big debate as i tried telling him its cheaper to use the timer but he still wouldnt have it..but in his minute defence it used less gas his way....