Heating on low and constant better?

espresso

TITEASCRAMP wrote: »

Must be metric because it was only put in about 6 months ago. Sorry I didnt know what you meant.

Thanks, I had assumed that it was cu M and was interested to compare the consumption of your condensing boiler to my non-condensing boiler.

TITEASCRAMP

espresso wrote: »

Thanks, I had assumed that it was cu M and was interested to compare the consumption of your condensing boiler to my non-condensing boiler.

I am not trying to cause an argument all i am saying is what my meter is telling me.

At the moment its on constant my rads are cold to touch, the sun is blasting through the windows and the house feels warm. I have a tshirt on.
In the last 4 hrs it has used 1 unit.
I dont know what to say. My logic sounds crazy but my meter cannot be lying

TITEASCRAMP

Cardew wrote: »

Well if you have it off for the 2 weeks it is presumably because you think it would save energy and money?

Is it so difficult to grasp the concept that if it saves money having heating off for 2 weeks it will save money having it off for 8 hours overnight?

Of course switching it off is cheaper. I never said my way was savng money. I said it was about the same.
Low constant verses 1hr morn 2 evening. The house is more pleasant and if it using about the same what's the problem.
The meter isnt lying is it.

TITEASCRAMP

albertross wrote: »

A closer analogy would be to compare one stop for 8 hours, compared to 1000's of stops, starts (what a boiler on 24/7 does). But the kettle analogy is closer to the real thing, does it cost more to fill a kettle with water, boil it for 3 mins, let it switch off, then switch it on every 20 seconds for the rest of the day to keep it boiling, compared to boiling it once or twice when you want a cup of tea.

The kettle analogy doesnt work like a condensing boiler. How can it. It evaporate. My boiler condenses.
I will try a new experiement constant for 16 hours and off whilst in bed.
I will let you know my findings

TITEASCRAMP

albertross wrote: »

The analogy works in the sense that a kettle loses it's heat through the spout and kettle material, and a house loses it through the walls/windows. Your efficient boiler may be why the figures are close, but the key to the principal is how (and how fast) the house loses its heat, rather than the workings of the boiler.

Look forward to your findings, even if they contradict my theory.

I promise I will be totally honest with you. I have been up to now.
I have a very well insulated property and a top of the range system.
This has to play a huge part in the test.
The old style gravity fed tank system cant be anywhere near as efficient.
My husband fit the system so that it would be efficient coz we are both always cold and want the heating on

MancBrel

Cardew wrote: »

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
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.

Just because the heating is "on" all day, doesn't mean that the boiler is burning all day. I find the reverse to be the case in fact. The thermostatic controls mean that the boiler only tops up the heat in the house once the temperature drops. This uses far less gas than having a timer come on twice a day and having to heat up a cold house.

Last year I was decorating my front living room and had to sit in the back of my house for a few weeks, where I could hear the boiler come on and off. This left me in absolutely no doubt that my boiler was charging up very little in order to top up the house heat, compared to the other method.

TITEASCRAMP

MancBrel wrote: »

Just because the heating is "on" all day, doesn't mean that the boiler is burning all day. I find the reverse to be the case in fact. The thermostatic controls mean that the boiler only tops up the heat in the house once the temperature drops. This uses far less gas than having a timer come on twice a day and having to heat up a cold house.

Last year I was decorating my front living room and had to sit in the back of my house for a few weeks, where I could hear the boiler come on and off. This left me in absolutely no doubt that my boiler was charging up very little in order to top up the house heat, compared to the other method.

Im glad you said that. I thought i must be going mad with these lot. I know what my meter is telling me and not making this up. It all must depend on what system you have.

givememoney

We leave the heating technically on all the time but switch the thermostat up and down accordingly.

At night on retiring we turn it down to above freezing so should it get too cold it comes on. When I get up I turn it up to about 70 but whenI go out to work again I turn it down.

This seems to work well and comparing with someone else in our road our bills are lower than theirs.

MancBrel

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.

Setting it low, is just doing that, if you set it too low for comfort, it will never get to a comfortable temperature. If you want it warm when you walk in after work, simply set the timer to come on half an hour early.

The cheapest way to use any energy is to use it when you need it, which means setting the timer to come on at appropriate times, not the thermostat. Thermostats need to be set at a comfortable temperature, whatever the weather is outside, setting trv's or heating wall thermostats too high doesn't heat up the house any faster (it is actually the reverse, esp with trvs because the boiler will be overwarming some rooms, and underwarming others), they are not the same as turning up the fire, or the boiler stat.

It is very difficult to compare a days or even one weeks bills with another when comparing the different methods, because to do that you would have to do it scientifically in a controlled environment, and we don't have control of the weather or outside temperatures, so it is impossible.

To summarise.

Set the boiler stat high.
Set the room stat to a comfortable temp, maybe a degree higher if you have trv's elsewhere.
set TRV's to comfortable temp, no higher. Don't bother heating rooms you don't use much, keep doors closed.
Set heating timer to come on at appropriate times, not all day if house is left unoccupied.

By the way, the kettle theory!! Where I work a former colleague (who was a Green Party Councillor at the time) had our kettle removed and replaced with a modern version of a geezer, that was insulated, and "topped up" the heat inside. She claimed that it was far greener and fuel effiecient. OUr employer agreed.

MancBrel

TITEASCRAMP wrote: »

Im glad you said that. I thought i must be going mad with these lot. I know what my meter is telling me and not making this up. It all must depend on what system you have.

I have a Worcester Bosch condenser. I also have very high ceilings in my 3 bedroomed victorian terrace. It's well insulted (roof & walls) and double glazed.

I used to heat up the house only to walk out the door every morning, which is a complete wast of money.