Heating system for house with no gas

Silent_Dancer

captainhindsight wrote: »

Going for anything other than an ASHP, GSHP or Biomass boiler is mad. Yes the capital install costs are higher but the ongoing running costs, fuel costs and RHI income make it the only option for central heating and in some cases even on grid properties.

Fuel and running cost for the technologies that you mention are a lot higher than oil. It is only the RHI that makes things economic and the new government is likely to phase it out in April 2016.

captainhindsight_2

Silent_Dancer wrote: »

Fuel and running cost for the technologies that you mention are a lot higher than oil. It is only the RHI that makes things economic and the new government is likely to phase it out in April 2016.

That is not true, pellet prices are typically no more than £250 a ton at 5kwh/kg that works out at 5p/kWh at its highest. Ashp cop of 3 and gshp typical cop of 4, so say 12p/kWh for electricity this is 4p/kWh for ashp and 3p/kWh for gshp. Yes oil is at a temporary historic low but not for long, these technologies will always be more cost effective in the long run that conventional heating.

Cardew

captainhindsight wrote: »

That is not true, pellet prices are typically no more than £250 a ton at 5kwh/kg that works out at 5p/kWh at its highest. Ashp cop of 3 and gshp typical cop of 4, so say 12p/kWh for electricity this is 4p/kWh for ashp and 3p/kWh for gshp. Yes oil is at a temporary historic low but not for long, these technologies will always be more cost effective in the long run that conventional heating.

It really would be nice if you would quantify your statements. Perhaps you could show where there is any trial of a GSHP that achieves a 'typical COP of 4' when installed.




You could read the EST 2 year trial of a large number of GSHPs, with the manufacturers in attendance, where the average system COP was well under 3. For air to water ASHP the average was 2.54; some were below 2.0.


https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/analysis-from-the-first-phase-of-the-energy-saving-trust-s-heat-pump-field-trial

On the more simplistic EST summary it states:

The sample of ground source heat pumps had


slightly higher measured system efficiencies than


the air source heat pumps. The ‘mid-range’ ground


source system efficiencies were between 2.3 and


2.5, with the highest figures above 3.0.

Similarly in various posts you apparently know with absolute certainty what will happen to fuel prices in the future. All the analysts I read are far less certain. There is a general consensus that fracking will be a huge factor in the medium to long term, with imports from North America a strong possibility. That will have a knock on effect on all fuels. In the shorter term, Putin wields power.


I don't want to get into a 'war of words' with you but your posts would be more effective if they were more measured.

captainhindsight_2

We've been through this before and you or someone else bought up this report which was discredited then, and nothing has changed!

Cardew

captainhindsight wrote: »

We've been through this before and you or someone else bought up this report which was discredited then, and nothing has changed!

That response illustrates perfectly the point I was making earlier about your posts on all manner of subjects.


A 123 page report by the UK government, and a less detailed report by the EST, both of which you obviously haven't read, and you dismiss them as discredited, without stating why.


So I ask again, please show any evidence to support your statement that a GSHP has 'a typical COP of 4.0'.

Ben84

Electric boilers make no sense to me. You have to pay all the money and disruption to install copper pipes all over the house, when you could far more easily run a cable to each heater and install an electric heater in each place you want. The electric heaters will also be completely independently controllable and need practically no maintenance. They'll also be silent.

Anyway, I'm not particularly advocating electric heaters, but if you're going to heat with electricity they beat electric boilers on every factor I can think of.

Whatever system you install, making sure your insulation and draft sealing is good will make it perform better and be cheaper to run. Even more money saving however, I've found central heating can become much less important with good insulation. I've installed thick insulation in the loft and walls, as well as secondary glazing throughout our early 1930s house and now we hardly use the radiators any more. Cooking and waste heat from various other smaller sources heats the house pretty well during the winter. I'm only keeping my central heating as it's here and it works, but I wouldn't buy it again today as there are cheaper to install options that at this level of use wouldn't be expensive to rely on. Based on this experience, I wouldn't spend thousands on a central heating system in a new house until I'd insulated and draft sealed well (if needed?) and seen how it performs in winter.

captainhindsight_2

Cardew wrote: »

That response illustrates perfectly the point I was making earlier about your posts on all manner of subjects.


A 123 page report by the UK government, and a less detailed report by the EST, both of which you obviously haven't read, and you dismiss them as discredited, without stating why.


So I ask again, please show any evidence to support your statement that a GSHP has 'a typical COP of 4.0'.

No I'm just saying I don't need to keep repeating my self to get through to you, I know the answer because I'm in the industry living it. You just scan through articles and pretend to be an expert.

Owain_Moneysaver

Ben84 wrote: »

Electric boilers make no sense to me. You have to pay all the money and disruption to install copper pipes all over the house, when you could far more easily run a cable to each heater and install an electric heater in each place you want.

'instantaneous' electric boilers yes, but you can also get a thermal store, which charges up on overnight off-peak electricity [possibly with daytime top-up from photovoltaic to an immersion heater], and that provides a heat source to radiators and hot water.

The heat output of individual radiators can be more controllable than NSH, and thermal stores can be better insulated than NSH so less heat is lost/wasted during the day.

Cardew

captainhindsight wrote: »

No I'm just saying I don't need to keep repeating my self to get through to you, I know the answer because I'm in the industry living it. You just scan through articles and pretend to be an expert.

You don't need to tell me anything - I know you are wrong. It is other readers who might be fooled by the nonsense you spout.


Well if you are the expert, provide some proof to back up your statements about typical heatpump COPs.


Also tell the UK government, Energy Saving Trust and the major heat pump manufacturers(including Mitsubishi and Daiken) why their published 2 year trial results are rubbish.


'Being in the industry' is meaningless because you are seemingly some form of salesman and obviously have no technical background or you wouldn't spout the nonsense you come out with time and again.

lovesgshp

A gshp can give a COP of 4 at 0C outside temperature with a 35C flow, with underfloor heating.
This reduces if the temperature required is @50C for rads @0C external, so goes to circa COP 3.