Energy myth-busting: Is it cheaper to have heating on all day?
Options
Comments
-
This sounds too good to be true but take a look at Heat Pumps.
Air source heat pumps are the cheapest to install but not quite as cheap to run as Ground source but the difference in efficiency is small.
This system works like a refrigerator but for heating it works in reverse, That is it heats rather than cools.
I installed one in my previous flat, I monitored the power consumption which was about 360 Watts and I estimate that the output in heat was very near 2.5Kw
There are heat pump central heating systems coming on the market now, Not cheap to install but really cheap to run, They will make gas central heating obsolete. I am an electrical engineer (Retired) I manufactured Night Storage heaters when they first came out, For domestic heating they are and were a con.
Google 'Heat Pumps' You will be amazed.
One heat pump for a living room will cost you £1,000 - £1,200 to have installed and save you a fortune and in summer you can reverse the process and get Air conditioning. I first used a small heat pump in my workshop 25 years ago0 -
In our house, there isn't a room thermostat - just thermostatically controlled valves on each radiator. To me this seems sensible, otherwise the two are fighting each other. Often room thermostats are located in a little used hall, rather than the living room!
It is now compulsory for there to be a room thermostat.
However you are absolutely correct that no matter where this thermostat is sited, it can cause problems.
Why would you want the boiler controlled by a thermostat in the hall? If your living room is not quite warm enough, you have to turn up the thermostat in the hall.
Conversely if the thermostat is in the living room, and that room is up to temperature, then there will be no heat in any other radiator in the house if you switch them on. - for instance if you want to turn on a bedroom radiator. You have to turn up the thermostat in the living room - which is warm enough already.0 -
Oldskool1, Thanks for conducting and sharing the results of your tests. One other variable that most seem oblivious to is the boiler efficiency. As in electronics, this is unlikely to be constant under different loads. This can be likened to the "Top Gear" scenario Prias v BMW M3, in which the Prias was driven as fast as possible and the BMW merely had to keep up. The BMW in these circumstances was more fuel efficient. Same applies to CH boilers.
Whilst I acknowledge your figures are fine and dandy in your circumstances, in mine I have tested similar scenarios over consecutive years and the difference was less than 5pc.
Again the size and energy efficiency of the property may have a significant bearing on any result.0 -
It is now compulsory for there to be a room thermostat.
However you are absolutely correct that no matter where this thermostat is sited, it can cause problems.
Why would you want the boiler controlled by a thermostat in the hall? If your living room is not quite warm enough, you have to turn up the thermostat in the hall.
Conversely if the thermostat is in the living room, and that room is up to temperature, then there will be no heat in any other radiator in the house if you switch them on. - for instance if you want to turn on a bedroom radiator. You have to turn up the thermostat in the living room - which is warm enough already.
It sounds a pain/issue but once you have set the trv's on the rads you don't often need to change them again. My house is currently controlled via digital room stat in a warm hall. Trv's in my office on 3 so halfway, room trvs on max, kitchens on 4, 2 spare bedrooms on 2.
Current temp 21deg, (wife works form home so on all day), when I have been in bath and sat in front of tv in my boxers
nudge it up to 22deg.
Result comfortable home, low gas bill (£56 per month), even though boiler is old, house well insulated and most importantly happy wifey lol.
Also worth noting the orientation as my house kitchen/office are south facing so warm on sunny winter days, the living room is north facing but only used at night.
Homes are so different as are working patterns that it's impossible to say definitively that one method works best unless its the method below.
Never putting your heating (or other heating), will give you cheap bills!!!
0 -
This sounds too good to be true but take a look at Heat Pumps.
Air source heat pumps are the cheapest to install but not quite as cheap to run as Ground source but the difference in efficiency is small.
This system works like a refrigerator but for heating it works in reverse, That is it heats rather than cools.
I installed one in my previous flat, I monitored the power consumption which was about 360 Watts and I estimate that the output in heat was very near 2.5Kw
There are heat pump central heating systems coming on the market now, Not cheap to install but really cheap to run, They will make gas central heating obsolete. I am an electrical engineer (Retired) I manufactured Night Storage heaters when they first came out, For domestic heating they are and were a con.
Google 'Heat Pumps' You will be amazed.
One heat pump for a living room will cost you £1,000 - £1,200 to have installed and save you a fortune and in summer you can reverse the process and get Air conditioning. I first used a small heat pump in my workshop 25 years ago
Firstly there are two types of Air Source Heat Pumps(ASHP)
You appear to have an Air to Air ASHP. The vast majority of ASHPs in UK fitted are Air to Water(Mitsubishi Ecodan etc) and can cost in excess of £10,000.
I am afraid your estimate of 2.5kW output from 360watt is simply impossible. The 'gain' from a heat pump is given by its COP(Co-efficient Of Performance). e.g. an input of 1kW giving an output of 3kW would have a COP = 3.0.
As the outside air gets colder the COP falls. To get an annual average COP of 3.0 is good, your figures suggest a COP of 6.94 which no company would dare to claim.
There are several threads on ASHPs in MSE and there are many problems with both types. Noise and units icing up are but two. I suggest anyone considering an ASHP reads these threads.
Lastly whilst a correctly operating ASHP can offer savings for oil and LPG users, all of the independent advice is don't bother if you have gas.0 -
Result comfortable home, low gas bill (£56 per month)
Thats not a low gas bill for this time of year. I would wonder where the leak is if mine was that high (this is nearly my gas and electric per month)
My house drops down to 17 degrees when we are out for the day and sits around 22-25 degrees (down stairs) in the evening. Boiler comes on for a hour in the morning and an hour at night but usually only heats the bedrooms.
The house is nice and comfortable when you first get up (even this morning to wake up at 6am to loads of snow).
Wood burner gets lit at about 5-6pm and the heat is allowed to drift around the house when it gets to hot down stairs.
Old victorian house which is now well insulated (can do more). Logs total cost £130 per year.
This is a stark difference from previous years when I changed;
Open fire to wood burner
Insulated under the floor and doubled the recommended insulation in the loft.
I still have to get the cavity walls done which hopefully will reduce my fuel costs even more.
Just a quick thing after reading all these point of view.
I was always under the impression that boilers worked more efficiently when working hard and not topping up.0 -
It sounds a pain/issue but once you have set the trv's on the rads you don't often need to change them again. My house is currently controlled via digital room stat in a warm hall. Trv's in my office on 3 so halfway, room trvs on max, kitchens on 4, 2 spare bedrooms on 2.
That might work for you. However it sounds like you heat the whole house, in the same fashion all day - which most of us don't.
I turn off trvs in all bedrooms, bathrooms(except for towel rails) and other reception rooms during the day. There is no need to heat them.
A couple of hours before the bedrooms are to be occupied the TRVs are turned on.
If my wall thermostat was in one living room, and the room up to temperature, the radiators wouldn't come on as the pump would not be working.
There simply isn't a 'one size fits all solution'.0 -
P.S.
Please don't raise the issue of what is more comfortable, or preventing damp. This is about cost!
So you don't consider comfort or preventing damp at all relevant?
It's all about the cost and the cost alone eh?
So turn your heating off for good. Beggar the comfort. Just save money! Surely that is the ultimate logic of your argument.
There is a difference between trying to save money and being miserly. Most people want to find the cheapest way to be comfortable when they are in their home, rather than turn it into a competition for who can put up with disconfort for longer."When the people fear the government there is tyranny, when the government fears the people there is liberty." - Thomas Jefferson1 -
Oldskool1, Thanks for conducting and sharing the results of your tests. One other variable that most seem oblivious to is the boiler efficiency. As in electronics, this is unlikely to be constant under different loads. This can be likened to the "Top Gear" scenario Prias v BMW M3, in which the Prias was driven as fast as possible and the BMW merely had to keep up. The BMW in these circumstances was more fuel efficient. Same applies to CH boilers.
Whilst I acknowledge your figures are fine and dandy in your circumstances, in mine I have tested similar scenarios over consecutive years and the difference was less than 5pc.
Again the size and energy efficiency of the property may have a significant bearing on any result.
No, a few here aren't oblivious to boiler efficiency.
Boiler efficiency will increase with a lower return temperature, and that further adds to the case of it being cheaper to turn heating on only as required (i.e. heating from cold) rather than all the time (with a higher return temperature).
If the reverse were the case, then there may be some regimes where you could possibly arrange for heating on all the time toi be cheaper than on when required (i.e. the boiler efficiency more than compensating for the extra heat loss) - but it isn't, so will always act to make constant heating even more expensive (i.e. you suffer the extra heat loss and a loss due to lower boiler efficiency).
That's probably why those who understand the effect of boiler efficiency haven't mentioned it. (Apart from the fact that, jusging by many posts on here, it's requiring people to run before they can crawl in terms of understanding).
On another point - many people seem to be confusing comfort/ice protection and other factors with cost. This thread is about whether it's cheaper (not better or more desirable or anything else) to have heating on all the time, or just as required.0 -
Thats not a low gas bill for this time of year. I would wonder where the leak is if mine was that high (this is nearly my gas and electric per month)
Wood burner gets lit at about 5-6pm and the heat is allowed to drift around the house when it gets to hot down stairs.
Old victorian house which is now well insulated (can do more). Logs total cost £130 per year.
.
Lol, your cheating though as you have the benefit of the log burner (I love em btw just don't look right in a modern house).
I am happy with gas bill £56 is per mth year round so not now. House is large 'ish' 4bed detached. So plenty of heat loss walls but all insulated!
You will have taller ceiling heights though so yes your doing well very well. 0
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173.1K Life & Family
- 247.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards