Underfloor heating - why don't more people have it?

ajazztune

Apologies if this question has been posted hundreds of times already (I did look through and couldn't see a similar post, though please feel free to redirect me), but I'm wondering if underfloor heating is so effective, efficient, cheap (according to the companies who install!) why doesn't everyone have it in their homes?

The times that I have been in a house or room with u/f heating I have to stay I've loved it.

I'm thinking of buying a north-south facing house (in Scotland) and I'm wondering if installing u/f heating in the rooms on the north side would be worth it and make up for being in the cold side?

Cardew

Name a company that doesn't claim that their electrical heating system is effective, efficient and cheap!

borkid

ajazztune wrote: »

I'm wondering if underfloor heating is so effective, efficient, cheap (according to the companies who install!) why doesn't everyone have it in their homes?

We considered underfloor heating a couple of years ago. Then realised that we have only seen underfloor heating fitted in the groundfloor ( apart from bathrooms which use electric UH) the rest is to rads. I have a guitar which I need to be careful with re heat and planned to have my music room on the ground floor. I just wouldn't trust myself not to forget and leave the case on the floor, if the top cracked I would be devestated.

We didn't get aroubnd to considering the costs.

ajazztune

@Cardew: doesn't really answer either of my questions...

macman

It's no more and no less efficient than any other kind of electric heating. And it's about 3 times as expensive as gas CH and DHW to run, since it's on single rate.
So it's only a sensible option for homes without mains gas. And only then if built in from new, as it's obviously a very expensive proposition to retrofit.
You might well find it comfortable to have warm toes, but that doesn't make it cheap or efficient.

Cardew

ajazztune wrote: »

@Cardew: doesn't really answer either of my questions...

Your questions seem to be based on the assumption that UF heating is 'efficient, effective and cheap'

The problem with underfloor heating is that it cannot operate at a high temperature.

Therefore to be effective at a low temperature, UF heating has to be on for long periods. This is why it is considered to be the favoured form of heating for properties with heat pumps(ASHP or GSHP).These operate at a higher efficiency with very low water temperatures; and heat pumps run for long periods each day - often 24/7 in cold weather.

Turning to UF electrical heating or from oil/gas heated water, again they need to be on long periods to get the room up to temperature. This is fine if you are home all day and can take advantage of the heat. However if you are at work during the day, you don't want to be heating an empty house. So it is better to have high powered heaters that come on before you return to the house.

GwylimT

In our last home we had under floor heating in our kitchen and it was a very chilly room in the winter, it wasn't expensive to run but it wasn't cheap either. You also need to run it for long periods of times to really benefit from it, you also need to be choosy with your floor covering, the thicker the tile etc the longer it takes for the heat to reach you/the room.

reeac

borkid wrote: »

We considered underfloor heating a couple of years ago. Then realised that we have only seen underfloor heating fitted in the groundfloor ( apart from bathrooms which use electric UH) the rest is to rads. I have a guitar which I need to be careful with re heat.

Your guitar has reheat? This I must hear [not].

borkid

reeac wrote: »

Your guitar has reheat? This I must hear [not].

That should have read 'regarding heat'. The sound board of a classical guitar can crack, due to the wood drying out, if it gets over heated.

aelitaman

I think it is because the lovely websites that tell you it is cheap to install do not tell you the whole truth.

My neighbour had UFH installed in the ground floor and to get the installation layer installed he had to have the floor dug out. But then building regs classed this as a new floor so he had to dig a long way deeper than the installation layer required, rebuild the floor, install the insulation, install the UFH.

No way was that cheap.

I can only assume that these companies saying it is cheap to install lay mats or pipes on top of an existing floor and then riase the floor level over them. With no insulation this is not going to be cheap to run.

princeofpounds

I was interested in it, but the thing that put me off was not getting any reliable, non-salesy data on the robustness of the system. I hated the idea of having to dig up flooring to fix a problem, even if it's several years down the line.

Maybe I was worrying over nothing, but who knows without proper evidence?