It's all a pack of LIES, I tell ya!

Automatic Washer - The world's coolest Washing Machines, Dryers and Dishwashers

Help Support :

Electronic Air Filters

I lived in a rental that had central heat & air conditioning. Smokers had lived there at some point and had the good sense to integrate an electronic air filter. These are about the same size as the thick (6" maybe?) and heavily pleated super filters used on some force air systems. The electronic type are great filters. You can tell the filter is doing its job by scraping the carpet at the return air intake and hearing all the snapping sounds of dust and dirt particles being trapped & zapped. When the filter needs cleaning, just pull it out and place it in the bottom rack of the dishwasher. When I replace my furnace, this is the type of filter I'll be looking to install. Meanwhile I'm using the "Filtrete" disposable type which are the next best thing.

Electric heat is out of the question. Gas is way cheaper in these parts. Even running a portable baseboard type heater in one room would send my PG&E bill through the roof. Been there, done that, lost my tee shirt.
 
Electric forced-air is quite common here, but gas is also. I've never seen electric baseboard. The rental house my parents were in when I was born had gas space heaters I'm pretty sure, or maybe a wall-unit. No gas in any house I've lived in since then. The house built in 1964 had electric resistance forced-air (but no air conditioning, we had window units). We moved in 1981 to a house built in 1972, resistance forced-air. When that system needed replacing in the mid 1990s, they got a heat pump. The apartment I moved into in 1987 had electric forced-air, as did the house I bought in 1991, which I changed to a heat pump in 2000. The house I bought in 2005 also is all-electric, with a heat pump.

12-13-2007-12-10-36--DADoES.jpg
 
in defense of electric heat

Have not had much experience with baseboard electric heat, so I can't comment on it. However, I have had experience with ceiling radiant and extensive experience with electric heat pump.

Ceiling radiant is the hands down winner for comfort from my experience. You don't hear it, see it, smell it. It's almost like sunshine. You just feel a cozy all encompassing warmth when you enter the room.

Disadvantages: You have to be VERY careful when mounting something in the ceiling (like a hanging pot). And..there is no ductwork, so if you want central air conditioning, you have
to add ductwork.

From my experience, the heat pump is the hands on winner for economy and reliability. I have had heat pumps in all my houses since 1982. They've all been great, but in the past few years the efficiency has really shot up. In the area of Ohio I live in, winters can vary from moderately mild to extended periods well below zero.

My heat pump has come through with flying colors. Around 5 or 10 degrees the supplemental resistance heat will cycle on periodically. A few years ago when had brief spell of about minus 20 F and that was the only time the resistance heat stayed on for any length of time.

My parents house is about the same square footage as mine and they have gas. It's comfortable, but their heating bills are much higher than mine and there is always that potential (albeit small) of a gas leak,carbon monoxide leakage, or explosion. It's (fortunately) not common, but it does occasionally happen.

From an ecological standpoint, it is much more efficient (aka green) for a central plant to produce power and distribute it to consumers. You have only the efficiency of the main power plant. With gas and oil central heat you have the inefficiency of each unit multiplied by the total number of units.

Each consumer unit is also producing emissions instead of only one point source of emissions from the central power plant. the carbon emissions pe unit are not overly large, but when you multiply them by each unit,it well exceeds the total that would have been emitted by a power plant providing the same BTU's of heat through distributed electricity.

Barry
 
All Baseboard Units require maintenance

The house I was born into has Oil fired hotwater baseboard radiators. If the house was a rectangle, they ran pretty much all the way up the long sides of the house, with the exception of the Kitchen, Bathroom and Toilets. In the Laundry they ran through two airing cupboards to provide drying cabinets. They were streamlined units with no taps, the vents could be opened and closed to adjust the heat in each room.

The house was built in 1960, and by 1985 the boiler had become unecconomical to service and repair.

My parents replaced it with LPG Hotwater, a Combustion stove in the Lounge and a Split System Reverse Cycle AC that vented into the Lounge and down the hallway to the bedrooms for emergencies. The Wood burning stove could keep the house warm throughout with nighttime lows of 1-2degC.

My point is, that baseboard heating of any sort takes up space, even when it's decomissioned it still requires cleaning as it fills up with cobwebs and dog hair etc. Every 3 months for the whole time we lived there, I had to go around and vaccum through the vent at the top and the inlet at the bottom, to get rid of the dirt, dust, fluff, doghair and every thing else that accumulates.

To say that its only Electric Baseboard Heat that is labour intensive is wrong, the other forms need service too. In Australia these days, heat pumps are the heating method of choice for most houses, either through ducting, or split system units. Electric doesnt doesnt have to mean Resistance heating. The modern units are extremely efficient and well suited to our climate, where it is very unusual for the Winter temp to go much below 0degC.
 
woulda, coulda, shoulda..........

Resistance electric heating provides 3.4 BTU/watt +/-, IIRC. Figure a 33% efficiency from the fuel-burning electrical generating station to end-user. Therefore a system that delivers aproximately 10.2 BTU/watt (3 x 3.4 BTU per watt) MINIMUM should be basically competitve with a fossil-fuel burning system. This level of efficiency, I believe, is quite modest and easily attainable. HSPF (Heating Season Performance Factor) is what is used to compare heating efficiencies and take into account defrosting and the need for supplemental heating. How exactly it is calculated I don't know.Of course, in very cold climates the efficiency of a heat-pump decreases as does the need for back-up heat.

Therefore, if a heat-pump uses 1/3 of the power/wattage as electric resistance coils to do the same job, it can be thought of as recapturing the 2/3 of the heat of the total energy consumed that is wasted at the generating plant.

For a few extra grand (US speak ==> where a grand is a thousand US dollars) I should have gotten a heat-pump instead of a simple central air-conditioner. By signing up for time-of-day (peak & off-peak metering and rates) with my electrical provider [it's volutary here, if even avaialable on Long Island] I could have used the heat-pump at night and on weekends with inexpensive off-peak power rates and gas or oil (my house has both) heating for usage during peak-rate periods.
 
Heat Pump

Perhaps the most efficient system is the ground source heat pump where there are pipes in the ground which either absorb heat (in the winter) or expell it (in the summer). Electrically run, these systems don't need supplemental electical resistance heat on the coldest days.

Of course they are more expensive than the air source heat pumps that most people have.

Natural gas is already imported into this country, mostly from Canada. And some comes in as liquified natural gas from the same folks that supply us with oil. Most of the large natural gas fields in the US have been depleted, and the suppliers are continually drilling new wells to meet the demand, one reason for the huge rise in cost. Much of our electricity is generated by the natural gas, but it can be generated by many other ways, such as wind, solar, geothermal, which are all renewable.

Right now I have gas fired forced air with electric split system air conditioning. When this system wears out I will need to decide if I want to go to a heat pump and possibly ground source. Nice thing about heat pump is that you have cooling too.
 
I'm sure that newer systems are more efficient,

But they're well outside the context of the ad. As are ceiling fans, low-e glass, triple-pane argon-filled window units and all of that. I'm also aware that my house is an unusual case because of the choices the original owners made.

This month's electric bill came today, and it's $449. I keep much of the house at 55 degrees, sometimes turning it up to 65 in the rooms I'm using. It's a fairly miserable existance, but I'm hoping to keep the bills below $800 for the rest of the winter.

I'm guessing that forced-air electric heat is more prevalent down south, where central air-conditioning was more common at the time. Most houses here didn't have that until the mid-70s, I'm thinking. Therefore, the builder could save quite a bit by not installing ducts and by using a single contractor for heat and electricity.

Ground source heat pumps are a nice idea. Of course, lack of ducts kind of makes that a moot point. That and the fact that my house and yard are situated on solid bedrock.

I love my house, I really do. I just wish the idiots that designed it hadn't gone out of their way to make any conversion so difficult -- and expensive!

As to cleaning, the heating elements in my baseboards get dangerously hot, so the fronts aren't easily removable. Vacuuming helps a little, but our humid summers help see to it that the dust stays where it lands.

-kevin
 
Conversion would not have to be that expensive or involve baptism or a bris. You could go with split system heat pumps and one can do up to three rooms. Was your home built to Gold Medalion standards with the extra insulation in the walls and attic? Has the attic insulation been beefed up as it has settled over the years? Do you use your vented dryer only at the warmest time of the day or warmest day of the week or whatever? A vented dryer pumps a minimum of 150 cubic feet of air outside every minute it is in operation. That nice inside air that you have paid to heat or cool is leaving and is being replaced by outside air that needs heating or cooling. If you have a sunny side of the house, slightly opening a window when the sun has warmed up that area when you use the dryer will allow slightly warmer air to enter as replacement air. Do your double pane windows still have a good seal between the panes or do they show signs of a broken seal? Have you vacuumed the baseboard heaters' fins? Do you have a fan operating that directs air toward the baseboard units to improve the convection? Has anyone installed wall to wall carpet that reduces the clearance between the floor and the bottom of the baseboard heaters? If air can't flow through them, the heat can't circulate into the room. Are your hot water pipes insulated? You have put your water heater on a timer; I'm sure. Is the insulation under the first floor still tight between the joists and against the floor? Have you put storm windows over your double pane windows? Do you have window coverings that provide insulation? Do you take advantage of passive solar heat gain during the day and then close the insulating draperies or shades when the sun is no longer shining on the glass?

I don't understand how you say that modern day innovations are outside the context of the ad. You are the one that posted the ad. It talks about electric heating before the lower electric space heating rates were abolished. At least some utilities still offer a special rate schedule if you have electric water heating. Ceiling fans are not new. I lived with and knew many people who lived with electric heat and it was not a back breaking way of heating, THEN. If today is outside of the ad's context, why do you use it to slam your electric heating, other than anger over the bills? I am sorry for your high bills, but if your house was not built to the standards for electric heating or if you have not upgraded construction shortfalls, it is not electric heat that is at fault and frankly, keeping the baseboard heaters this long after much more efficient methods have come out has been your choice in a trade off. You have not spent the money to upgrade, so you are paying it to your power company. I cannot imagine living at the temperatures you keep inside your house. BRRR
 
Powerplants these days are actually in the 50% to 60% range actually. This is what makes an electric automobile actually more efficient than a fossil-fuel automobile (even despite transmission losses), which is in the 25% to 30% range. Heat is the primary energy released when burning a fossil fuel...mechanical motion is merely a side effect, which is the reason why a home gas furnace can be in the 95% efficiency range. In a fossil fuel power plant, heat energy is converted to mechanical motion using a steam boiler and turbines. In an automobile, all that heat is dissipated in a radiator. In order to recover that heat energy, it would make the propulsion system in a car too large, and it would be impractical to operate due to the fact an automobile is asked to perform at different speeds, loads, and temperatures, unlike a power plant.

Electric baseboard heat is basically 100% efficient because it converts all the electrical energy to heat, but in the long run, more fuel is burned. The heat pump is the best way to heat electrically, but it has it's problems. The primary one is the life expectancy of the heat pump. The average life is only around 15 years, where the life of a fossil-fuel system, or even an electric baseboard system can be well over 25 years. The second one is simply in the way it works. Heat pumps produce heated output that while it's higher than the room's ambient temperature, it is below the body's skin temperature (skin is around 91-95 degrees F, heat pump can vary between 78-90 F). In order for a heat pump to be efficient, it must also move lots of air. The result of these two factors makes heat pump heated homes feel cold and drafty. The end result is that the user ends up cranking the thermostat up a few degrees to compensate, and in some cases, this negates the efficiency gains over a fossil-fuel source, especially in cold climates.
Toggle's idea of a ground source heat pump helps this out considerably, because with the much warmer ground, the heated output temperature is higher. I have also heard of setups where a gound souce heat pump "boiler" is even used to heat water for radiant floor heating.

I imagine one of the reasons why electric baseboard became popular in the late 60's too is simply because of the cost of the equipment and installation. Home-Depot sells electric baseboard strips for around $40 for a 2KW strip (7000BTU) The average amateur electrician could put one in with relative ease. Compare this to the price of even a window-unit heat pump, which runs in the $400 range. Once you factor in the installed cost of each, a builder, even today, could save thousands by installing electric baseboard over a heat pump...the house would just not be air conditioned! (this may work in northern climates!)
 
Statistcs can be made to show anything you WANT them to say.

~Powerplants these days are actually in the 50% to 60% range actually.
Yes, but how much is lost in the transmission process? Is this form of loss included in the above figures?

Perhaps it is important to look at total energy input to make elctricity versus what is acutally harvested/avaiailble as output.
"100% efficiency" [at point of use only] of electric heat is misleading to those who are not looking at the bigger picture.

An unvented gas heater is technically nearly "99 44/100%" percent efficient as well, but that is because the 10 to 25% efficiency gain over vented models includes airborne poisons and other by-products of the combustion process that are deletrious to one's health. To me, that is no "efficiency" gain AT ALL!
 
Tom,

When I decided to make fun of an old ad and vent a little about my high power bills, I certainly didn't expect that anyone would get upset or take it personally. I also didn't quite expect to have people insult me.

I'm sure nobody wants me to go into excruciating detail about my house's design and layout, but I'll try to address a few things you mentioned, and then I'll wash my hands of this thread.

I don't honestly know whether my house was built to Gold Medallion standards. I rather doubt it. As I said, many of the problems stem from the original owners' poor decisions.

Yes, I have added insulation to my attic and my water pipes. I vent the dryer indoors in winter to take advantage of the heat and humidity coming out of it.

There are a lot of double-pane windows on the house, but most of them face north. The south windows are mostly single-pane, double-hung units with combination storms. We put 3M plastic over all of them in the winter. And we have insulated curtains and blinds.

Insulation under the first floor? Here again we start running into the bad decisions. The lower level has a concrete floor, poured onto bedrock. It's a big heat-sink. Additionally, the ceilings down there are 7' high. This, in addition to several features of the layout (large central chimney for the fireplaces, the stairway, the upper level overhanging by 2' on two sides, windows and doors that go nearly to the ceiling, a concrete room jutting into the front of the lower level, etc.) makes the installation of ductwork impracticable. Of course ducts could be installed in the attic, but even insulated ducts in a sub-zero space will lose quite a bit of heat, and pumping the heat back down to the floor doesn't work well.

As to not spending money to upgrade, the fact is that I don't have the money to upgrade. You claim that upgrading or converting wouldn't cost as much as I said, but you're quite wrong about that. I've had several heating contractors in to look at the situation over the years, and all of them have come up with estimates of at least $10,000. They were only able to come up with something that cheap by deciding not to install heat in certain areas of the house. This would obviously reduce the energy savings.

There was also a $15,000 estimate for baseboard water heat in all rooms on on both floors, but that didn't include closing up the walls and ceilings after everything was installed. That was also 18 years ago.

I'm able to do a lot of work myself, so I considered in-floor water heat, which would only heat the upper level, but some radiant heat would come out of the ceiling downstairs. The cost of materials for the heating system alone came to just under $10,000. This would require removing all of the ceilings on the lower level, so the repair work would be extensive.

Given prices like those, the savings in energy would take something like 10-20 years to pay off the cost of a new system, much longer in fact since I'd have to take out a loan to pay for it all.

On a limited budget, any upgrade would have to have a fairly short payback period.

Again, I'm well aware that my house isn't average. In many ways that makes me love it more, but in one particular way it causes problems. Obviously I could move someplace cheaper to heat, but complaining a little and laughing about it is a much easier option. Sometimes that doesn't quite work out.

-kevin
 
Pete,

I do have a supplemental wood furnace that can help in three rooms, but it was always difficult to keep it lit and keeping wood in it cost nearly as much as it saved. I need to look into a more modern, efficient unit, I guess.

I haven't researched pellet stoves much. Time to look into that.

-kevin
 

Latest posts

Back
Top