Keeping heating on 24 hours to save energy

Halle71

My husband and I have been arguing about this:

I grew up with Northern parents who were stingy with heating, a trait I have inherited, whereas he grew up in NZ where there is no need for central heating.

I can't believe it would be cheaper to keep heating at a low level all the time than only use heat as and when you need it rather But I would be delighted to be proved wrong :j

http://www.askjeff.co.uk/will-keeping-heating-increase-bills/


I found this article by Jeff Howell in the Telegraph which supports keeping heating on and it is fairly convincing but does anyone actually do this and what have your experiences been?

We currently couldn't use his method effectively as we don't have room thermostats or even a boiler timer that works but after some spring building work we will do.

During the week we are out from 8am to 6pm so don't use heating at all during this period. When we are in we rarely heat the middle floor - empty spare room, study, bathroom, our bedroom - just heating the ground floor and the loft where the kid's bedrooms and bathroom are.

So would it really be cheaper to say keep it at 17 when we are not there, and 20 when we are?

Any thoughts welcome.

saveallmymoney

I think it can be difficult because there are so many variables in your house, heating system and habits.

All you can really do is try it and see.

Due to kids being off sick for over a week at home this Jan i've discovered that its only slightly more expensive (boiler fires for about 2% more of the time) to have the heating on at 18c in our house during the day than turn it off, but our heating comes on at 4pm when the kids get home from school anyway so its a very different situation to you. I also have a sophisticated controller and TRV's.

DTDfanBoy

The whole article is pretty shoddily written if you ask me.

"Hence my advice that in cold weather, rather than run your central heating for two hours in the morning and six in the evening, it is better to keep it on the “24 hour” setting, but running at a low boiler temperature.

Turn all your thermostatic radiator valves to the highest number, or “max”, and turn the boiler thermostat down to 1, or “min”. The room thermostat can be at whatever temperature you find comfortable – I’d suggest 19C or 20C during the day, and perhaps down to 16C at night, but you can make your own choices. This advice is offered for its guiding principles, not as rigid instructions."

If you have a non condensing boiler doing the above will ensure that your boiler is running as inefficiently as possible.

I don't buy his condensation argument either.

MillicentBystander

Does your hubby keep his car engine running/ticking over overnight/when he is not driving it?

JJ_Egan

Massive MSE thread already on this very question .

Fruit_and_Nut_Case

JJ_Egan wrote: »

Massive MSE thread already on this very question .

For thread read threads.

Cardew

DTDfanBoy wrote: »

The whole article is pretty shoddily written if you ask me.

"Hence my advice that in cold weather, rather than run your central heating for two hours in the morning and six in the evening, it is better to keep it on the “24 hour” setting, but running at a low boiler temperature.

Turn all your thermostatic radiator valves to the highest number, or “max”, and turn the boiler thermostat down to 1, or “min”. The room thermostat can be at whatever temperature you find comfortable – I’d suggest 19C or 20C during the day, and perhaps down to 16C at night, but you can make your own choices. This advice is offered for its guiding principles, not as rigid instructions."

If you have a non condensing boiler doing the above will ensure that your boiler is running as inefficiently as possible.

I don't buy his condensation argument either.

Well said.

I tend to agree with the article that the EST is heavily biased toward anything green.

It appears that we are to accept Fourier’s Law of heat conduction is trumped by Howell's damp brick law;)

Cardew

saveallmymoney wrote: »

I think it can be difficult because there are so many variables in your house, heating system and habits.

All you can really do is try it and see.

Due to kids being off sick for over a week at home this Jan i've discovered that its only slightly more expensive (boiler fires for about 2% more of the time) to have the heating on at 18c in our house during the day than turn it off, but our heating comes on at 4pm when the kids get home from school anyway so its a very different situation to you. I also have a sophisticated controller and TRV's.

Boilers modulate their output. It could run 20% more of the time at low output and be cheaper, or 20% less at a higher output and be more expensive.

JJ_Egan

MillicentBystander wrote: »

Does your hubby keep his car engine running/ticking over overnight/when he is not driving it?

You should really think about that as they are not comparisons .

A car has a purpose of movement not of being warm.


CH has a purpose of warming not moving .


The key question is how much does it cost me/you to heat the house for normal use either am to bedtime or 24 hours .
You can then work out how much it costs to put the heat on am turn off until cold and then heat up again .
But again that is influenced by many factors not least the current weather .

Lurker21

My boiler serves the central heating and hot water.

A couple of years ago I turned the boiler temperature down as suggested above. But for some reason the pump kept running all the time.

It turned out the thermostat on the hot water cylinder was set higher than the boiler temperature, so the pump kept trying in vain to get the cylinder up to temperature.

Southend1

Cardew wrote: »

Boilers modulate their output. It could run 20% more of the time at low output and be cheaper, or 20% less at a higher output and be more expensive.

Mine doesn't modulate output, it is either on or off.