Huge, Massive Gas Meter Reading Help ???

mute_posting

Strawberry1 wrote: »

I also had few other recommendations from some of my friends who told me to leave the heating on constant (15 degree all the time and maybe put it to few more degrees in the evening, 20) as opposed to use the timer. I checked with my energy supplier and they told me that it was the best way forward and by doing this I would consume less than using a the timer.

Your friends were swayed by the urban myth, think of it using this analogy...

If you could leave your kettle just "simmering" all day and then boosted it a bit to boil it when you wanted a cuppa, do you think that would be cheaper than just boiling the water you needed, when you needed it? Probably not

As for your supplier, I'm afriad they are in the business of selling energy, the more they sell the more profits they make.

Cardew

turnbulltj wrote: »

Both of these are stated as Actuals. Compared to my previous years usage I can definitiely conclude that Oct to Dec quarter was most definitely not an actual reading and I think British Gas obviously have an issue with their Meter Readers.

I am therefore concluding that 800+ unit usage is more like 2 quarters use i.e 6 months not 3. This would concur with 2005 and 2006. I would be grateful of your comments (especially Muteposting and Cardew) to see if you concur with my findings.
regards,

Trevor

Firstly, was the start reading an actual reading? I know you said it was, but BG in particular are always giving a meter reading annotated "we read your meter" and they didn't!! A meter reader will often not bother to read a meter but 'guess and enter it as an actual reading.

If I had to gamble, I would gamble on the 10th Jan reading being an underestimate/false reading(despite what the bill states.)

Nuff said?

I am pretty certain that your reasoning is sound!!

ianmr65

Cardew wrote: »

If the thermostat is faulty(eg doesn't open when the water gets up to temperature) it will boil - literally boil - and it will most certainly NOT seem normal when it comes out of the tap.

If the boiler "keeps burning away" where do you think the heat goes? A HW tank - even an unlagged tank - cannot dissipate heat quick enough to prevent it boiling.

.

I agree with everything you say, if the thermosat was not operatating at all. but if the thermostat were under reporting water temperature, by say 10 or 20 degrees, (due to furring of the diode or whatever, ) the feedback loop implicit in a bolier /tank system, would keep the boiler firing, and the excess heat would be dissapated round the pipes. especially if the 'hot water was left on all day'

Cardew

ianmr65 wrote: »

I agree with everything you say, if the thermosat was not operatating at all. but if the thermostat were under reporting water temperature, by say 10 or 20 degrees, (due to furring of the diode or whatever, ) the feedback loop implicit in a bolier /tank system, would keep the boiler firing, and the excess heat would be dissapated round the pipes. especially if the 'hot water was left on all day'

'Furring of a diode????@

You said they wouldn't notice the increase in temperature " but all seems normal when it comes out of the tap"

So the boiler keeps firing to make up for "under reporting' water temperature, and all that heat is dissapated round the pipes.

So the temperature in the system appears to be self regulating?

Run that by me again!!

mute_posting

ianmr65 wrote: »

I agree with everything you say, if the thermosat was not operatating at all. but if the thermostat were under reporting water temperature, by say 10 or 20 degrees, (due to furring of the diode or whatever, ) the feedback loop implicit in a bolier /tank system, would keep the boiler firing, and the excess heat would be dissapated round the pipes. especially if the 'hot water was left on all day'

A thermostat is a one point device (it is either on or off, the point may be adjustable) are you thinking of a temperature sensor?

MP

ianmr65

Well thermostats have a temperature diode, or sensor, which is in contact with the water, this trips the thermostat on or off.

The system can have one hot water thermostat or two
A boiler thermostat and a tank thermostat

In the cae of two:
Say either thermostat diode is faulty and is under reporting the temperature by 20 degrees
The faulty thermostat thinks the water is at say 30 degrees, the water is really at 50 degrees, the boiler, going by what the faulty thermostat is telling it keeps working to bring the temperature up to 60 degrees, (really 70) which the other thermostat confirms if there are two - as that is the setting. The residual 10 degrees is lost by convection round the system. So the boiler is constantly on, at low output - but the water flows at a normal 60 degrees temperature.

In the case of one
The faulty boiler theromastat thinks the water is at say 30 degrees, the water is really at 50 degrees, the bolier, going by what the faulty thermostat is telling it keeps working to bring the temperature up to 60 degrees, The residual 10 degrees is lost by convection round the system. So the boiler is constantly on, as above but the water flows at a normal temperature

mute_posting

I don't get where the "residual 10 degrees" comes from if the error is 20?

The system can have one hot water thermostat or two
A boiler thermostat and a tank thermostat...

In the case of one
The faulty boiler theromastat

Is that a typo?

A thermostat is a switch that switches as a pre-determined temperature (sometimes fixed, sometimes variable but when set it operates at the same temeperature give or take)

On a conventional boiler (like OP's) if the hot water is not upto temperature, the stat is closed and the boiler fires up, if it reaches temp, the stat opens the circuit and the boiler shuts down to pilot light (please correct me anyone if I am wildly wrong here) - there is a wide enough hysteresis on the stat so that the boiler isn't on and off like the proverbial bride's nightie

Cardew

ianmr65 wrote: »

The residual 10 degrees is lost by convection round the system. So the boiler is constantly on, as above but the water flows at a normal temperature

You surely are not being serious?

If the boiler is constantly on, the water boils!

Cardew

Just a point for those who have convinced themselves that leaving the HW on 24/7 is a huge extra cost.

Tomstickland in another thread has come up with a number of sites that give a formal specification for maximum heat loss from a lagged tank.

All of these quote a loss of less than 3kWh per day, so at the outside we are talking of a maximum loss of 1,000kWh a year.

Bearing in mind that even if you only heat on a timer you will still incur a proportion of those losses.

So at around 3p/kWh(incuding boiler efficiency) for gas you are talking about a maximum difference of £30 a year between timing your hot water and leaving it on 24/7. The probable difference is less than £20 a year.

Please, please don't post that you should still have it on a timer because otherwiuse you will single handedly cause Global warming - of course you should have your HW on a timer.

The point of this post is that leaving your water on 24/7 is not going to account for £hundreds a year, as some posters have been trying to tell the OP.

climbatron

Going back to the OP...

Trevor, I am in a similar situation - I have a huge bill and am trying to fathom where all my gas has gone. You mentioned that you are using 800+ units per quarter. Have you compared your usage to friends with a similar size house? I have been told (unreliably?) that average usage will be around 3 units / day, whereas I am using around 13 / day. At 800 units in a quarter you are using around 6 units / day which would be around double average.

Do any of the more knowledgeable members know if 3 unit / day is a realistic figure for winter use?