Heating on low and constant better?

rich68

It's an interesting question and I've been thinking about this myself lately.

I used to live in a flat with ceiling heating. If I turned on the heating when I came home from work I needed to turn it up to the max (number 5) and it was just about getting warm when it was time for bed, some hours later. If I left the heating on all day and night, I only needed to put it on number 1. I think the cost was about the same. But the insulation was quite good.

Later on I didn't bother with the ceiling heating and used electric convector heaters instead just when required. This was more satisfying because it was a quick warm up plus they were not on for very long.

Now I live in an old place where there is no insulation (at least it feels like it). To keep the heating on all the time is really costly and I think it comes down to the number of hours that the heating is running. The only way to decide for sure is to watch the meters and try out the methods for a week or two.

Cardew

This subject has been covered lots of times in this forum, so we really should get this straight once and for all as there is an element of confusion introduced(possibly inadvertently) by some of the above posts.

It is most definitely not cheaper to have the heating or hot water on constantly, rather than on a timer.

That is not an opinion, it is a fact, supported by the Laws of Physics. The Energy Saving Trust specifically states:

Is

it more economical to leave my heating on 24hrs in the winter?



Answer

No. It is a common misconception that it is cheaper to leave your hot water and heating on all the time. Boilers use more power initially to heat water from cold, however the cost of this is greatly exceeded by the cost of keeping the boiler running all of the time.
The best solution is to programme your heating system so that it comes on when you need it most (possibly early morning and in the evening), and goes off when you don't need it (when you are out of the house or asleep). There are a range of controls that can be used and your heating engineer will be able to provide you with the most appropriate solution.
Depending on your circumstances it may be necessary to keep the heating on all day during winter but it will cost more than if you turn the heating off when you don't need it.

So regardless of the temperature you set on your boiler, on your room thermostat or TRVs(thermostatic radiator valves) it will always be cheaper to have heating on a timer rather than leave it on constantly. That is after all why we have timers on CH systems!

Taking the urban myth theory(that heating on constantly is cheaper) to the extreme, if you go away for several weeks in the winter you should leave your heating on constantly at the temperature you normally set.

Obviously nobody would do that, as turning off your heating for several weeks will clearly save money. However it is exactly the same principle in turning it off for a few hours – it saves money.

I can only think the confusion arises from the experiments carried out above is that they are comparing having heating on 24/7 with a low temperature set, to heating on a timer with a higher temperature set for the periods the heating is operating.

TITEASCRAMP

I have done the experiment and i have told you my findings.
Last year i used 8 units a day for 3 hours, i have used the same leaving it on constant.

The thing is my rads turn off during the day if the room heats up due to the sun blasting through the windows. Then when it goes in they heat up again.
Maybe the figures vary depending on what type of boiler you have.
I have an A rated condensing combi boiler. New rediators and a fully insulated house.
i can only tell you my findings but i am not wrong

themrs_2

may be a matter of opinion, but we have found leaving it on 24/7 is better on the wallet, i think everyone has there own situation and it is dependent on that

TITEASCRAMP

themrs wrote: »

may be a matter of opinion, but we have found leaving it on 24/7 is better on the wallet, i think everyone has there own situation and it is dependent on that

i think its down to the house and the boiler and how new the system is

iceicebaby

I have done the experiment and found the opposite is true for me. I used far less gas and therefore paid far less bill having mine on timed versus having it in low all the time.

Please see below what I posted on another thread about this


Hiya

Just to answer the OP's question and to back up what most have said here.

I was in the leave it on low all the time brigade for many years as I was under the impression that was the most efficient.

However , when I first joines this site last November I read that it is more efficient to have it on just when you need it. So I did an experiment as I too was unsure.

I timed my water and heating to come on only when I needed then and compared the usage to the previous year when both had been on constantly.

Now I do have the units used written down somewhere, but not to hand. I compared the units used the previous year (as advised on my bills - yes I keep then all!!) and the actual units used that year and I found that less units are used if you time the heating/water to come on only when you need it.

Just as a ball park figure, I was paying £40 a month for gas and now I pay £19, and am well in credit foir the winter months. I am not saying yours will drop by as much, but just to give you an idea. If I can find where I put the info of the exact units used to compare I will post them.

I have my heating on in the winter for an hour in the morning and about 4 to 5 hours in the evening , and the hot water on for half an hour each evening which is plenty to heat up my 100 litre tank. I have an electric shower so dont need hot water in the mornings and the water is still warm from the previous night anyway. I live in a 2 bedroom Semi.

Hope this helps

TITEASCRAMP

iceicebaby wrote: »

I have done the experiment and found the opposite is true for me. I used far less gas and therefore paid far less bill having mine on timed versus having it in low all the time.

Please see below what I posted on another thread about this


Hiya

Just to answer the OP's question and to back up what most have said here.

I was in the leave it on low all the time brigade for many years as I was under the impression that was the most efficient.

However , when I first joines this site last November I read that it is more efficient to have it on just when you need it. So I did an experiment as I too was unsure.

I timed my water and heating to come on only when I needed then and compared the usage to the previous year when both had been on constantly.

Now I do have the units used written down somewhere, but not to hand. I compared the units used the previous year (as advised on my bills - yes I keep then all!!) and the actual units used that year and I found that less units are used if you time the heating/water to come on only when you need it.

Just as a ball park figure, I was paying £40 a month for gas and now I pay £19, and am well in credit foir the winter months. I am not saying yours will drop by as much, but just to give you an idea. If I can find where I put the info of the exact units used to compare I will post them.

I have my heating on in the winter for an hour in the morning and about 4 to 5 hours in the evening , and the hot water on for half an hour each evening which is plenty to heat up my 100 litre tank. I have an electric shower so dont need hot water in the mornings and the water is still warm from the previous night anyway. I live in a 2 bedroom Semi.

Hope this helps

I think it down to the system that each person has and house well insulated the house is.
Something must be, for people to be having different results.
What do you think?

iceicebaby

TITEASCRAMP wrote: »

I think it down to the system that each person has and house well insulated the house is.
Something must be, for people to be having different results.
What do you think?

My mum moved into a brand new house last year with a combi boiler, well insulated etc.. She was of the leave it on all the time brigade, she now has it on timed as she also has shown savings doing this.

Not sure why this has not worked for you. Maybe you need to do the experiment over a longer period of time, especially as the weather is still quite mild at the moment. I did mine 1 winter's usage versus another winter's usage. (cos im sad enough to keep my bills all filed in date order!) so I had the previous year's usage to compare to when I did the experiment last year.

TITEASCRAMP

albertross wrote: »

This argument will never end, you don't keep the kettle on all day, in case you want a cup of tea quick when you get home, so why leave the heating on when you are out.

Well no it would eveporate so that not the same at all

TITEASCRAMP

No not at all i have a condensing boiler. For it to condense the return flow temp has to be 54 deg. My point is that it doesnt start to condense the moment it is switched on.