« First « Previous Comments 21 - 46 of 46 Search these comments
Where I live they should call new developments "Stonehenge" because the houses are so close together that only during the solstice does light penetrate the gaps.
My wife's aunt in Colorado said the builders there are no longer allowed to install gas fireplaces. She said it was a "green" initiative.
All in the name of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, the ignorant fools….
you use it to run a heat pump in your home to get 3 times energy that you put into it.
Use it in an electric resistance heater and you're producing almost twice as much CO2.
How does that work?
What? They just did away with wood fireplaces, and now gas fireplaces too?
Okay, I'll bite. Why do you think this is a bad thing?
I know the mechanics. What I want to know is how you "get 3 times energy that you put into it."
HeadSet says
How does that work?
Like and air conditioner, in reverse. In fact I have this Frigidaire unit from home depot that I'm using for heating right now.
Shaman says
3) you lose 25% of the power in transmission line resistance.
The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) estimates that annual electricity transmission and distribution (T&D) losses averaged about 5% of the electricity transmitted and distributed in the United States in 2017 through 2021.
EBGuy says
I know the mechanics. What I want to know is how you "get 3 times energy that you put into it."
HeadSet says
How does that work?
Like and air conditioner, in reverse. In fact I have this Frigidaire unit from home depot that I'm using for heating right now.
Going into engineering has destroyed almost all my youthful ideas.
But when you are pulling energy out of the atmosphere, you can increase it beyond 100% efficiency.
As a CHILD, I used to wonder why furnaces weren't used to generate electricity, reasoning that because it produced heat in the end, it was better than just burning diesel, wood, or natural gas. As an adult, I realized that the complexity of such a system requires energy to produce it, and you very well not regain the energy cost of manufacture over time.
That said, looking to the future, ground source models will only continue to grow in prominence as costs come down as they don't have to operate at such low temperatures as they use the earth as a heat source.
"Heat pump" and geothermal are not the same thing.
Headset, what is up man. You are very skeptical these days.
I have also toured homes that have "geothermal" for heating and cooling, where buried pipes circulating fluid take advantage of underground constant temperature to heat/cool that fluid before it goes through coils in a forced air blower.
You may be able to get away with that for cooling (average earth temp is 57 degrees), but you most definitely need a heat pump for the heating function (unless you're going for the living underground feel...)
EBGuy says
Headset, what is up man. You are very skeptical these days.
Fellows, you were talking about residential heat pumps, which as Rickwicks said, are like reverse air conditioners. The common heat pump has the ability to move heat from a colder environment to a warmer one. Otherwise, it would not be a "pump," and it takes energy to do so. I have also toured homes that have "geothermal" for heating and cooling, where buried pipes circulating fluid take advantage of underground constant temperature to heat/cool that fluid before it goes through coils in a forced air blower. Nobody calls that geothermal system a "heat pump," as no heat is pumped. The only pump in a geothermal system is the pump that circulates the fluid. In fact, I had planned to have geothermal installed in the house I bought in 2014 but was denied by covenants.
« First « Previous Comments 21 - 46 of 46 Search these comments
Move Sooner. Live Better. Why Wait?