Pretty good article about heating and climate change

ethicalpaul

This reporter did a good job. Regardless of your feelings about heat pumps he seems to have hit all the points

https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2021/02/right-way-heat-your-home/618141/

Steamhead

Nicely written press release. Anyone remember the Acadia heat pump, and how it was supposed to make oil and gas heating obsolete? And, how spectacularly it failed?

Jamie Hall

A god article, indeed, and thank you, @ethicalpaul for posting the link.

However... while it is reasonably feasible for heat pumps -- particularly as they become more advanced -- to take over many of the space heating applications, always assuming the the electrical grid is improved enough to handle the demand, there is still a substantia fraction of the space heating demand which heat pumps -- so far at least -- are completely unable to handle, which would have to have really expensive work done to them. And, as I have murmured so often, just who is going to pay for that? The mentioned rebates don't even come close -- by at least an order of magnitude.

bucksnort

But who wants a new electric power plant to power their electric gizmos, cars, A/C and heat pumps? Buhler, Buhler? The power plant 20 miles North of me just announced they were shutting down in 5 years. 6 years ago they spent 500 million for new coal scrubbers to eliminate the 10 lbs. of mercury they were emitting every year. Now they support a 2000 acre solar farm 5 miles from me because the power lines from the coal plant go through the site. Problem where I'm at is it's sunny about 35% of the time vs. say Denver.
But solar is so sexy and green. But in 20 years the panels are junk and then what do you do with them?
Too many of these writers think meat comes from the back room of the supermarket and just because you can plug your Tesla in the juice justs magically appears. The huggers shut down new transmission lines but don't understand why they're unable to plug their IPhone in and charge it up because of the rolling blackout.
Yes, my utility went "green". Built wind farms 300 miles away from the market. You were able to buy this "green" energy for 50% more to feel good. But it's hip to be green. Think of the power loss over that 300 miles though.

Zman

I am really liking The Atlantic.
I just finished reading this one https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/02/how-public-health-messaging-backfired/618147/ when @ethicalpaul posted this well written piece.

SlamDunk

I agree with the writer about induction stove tops. I brag about mine all the time ( like right now) but I didn't get it for the bragging rights or to save the environment. I got it for self preservation- the Misses kept walking away from the stove and not returning until smoke detectors went off. The last event was caused when she went to a doctors appointment forgetting she was boiling a dozen eggs. Two hours later, the house stunk and there was egg on the ceiling in the kitchen and the dining room!

Went to a show room, the sales lady asked if we ever heard of an induction stove top? No, of course. She puts a ten dollar bill on an eye, sits a pot of water on it and boils it. Tells us the stove can turn itself off when it detects no water in a pot and boil overs. Spills don't get crusted on stove eyes because they are never hot enough. After her spiel, she pulls out the ten and it isn't even singed. Sold! It was four times more than we ever imagined paying but we still have a roof over our heads. Peace of mind.

ethicalpaul

Jamie Hall said:

A god article, indeed, and thank you, @ethicalpaul for posting the link.

However... while it is reasonably feasible for heat pumps -- particularly as they become more advanced -- to take over many of the space heating applications, always assuming the the electrical grid is improved enough to handle the demand, there is still a substantia fraction of the space heating demand which heat pumps -- so far at least -- are completely unable to handle, which would have to have really expensive work done to them. And, as I have murmured so often, just who is going to pay for that? The mentioned rebates don't even come close -- by at least an order of magnitude.

Thanks. Yes, that's why I thought this article was especially good. He listed out the issues like that and specifically said that it was not an instant replacement across the board. Many people live in areas where they can use heat pumps for much (no, not necessarily all) of their heating.

Some of you have seen me talking about issues at my mom's house. Her heat pump is not even very modern, I think it's about 10 years old and I currently have it set to provide heat whenever it's over 25 degrees outside, which is surprisingly often even in the dead of winter in New Paltz, NY. I understand that's not Vermont or NH but still, not bad. And yes she will keep her oil for a backup/aux heat.

Did you really feel it was a press release, @Steamhead ? Are you opposed to any heat transfer technology or is there a place for it? Or should every house burn fuel forever?

ethicalpaul

bucksnort said:

But who wants a new electric power plant to power their electric gizmos, cars, A/C and heat pumps? Buhler, Buhler? The power plant 20 miles North of me just announced they were shutting down in 5 years. 6 years ago they spent 500 million for new coal scrubbers to eliminate the 10 lbs. of mercury they were emitting every year. Now they support a 2000 acre solar farm 5 miles from me because the power lines from the coal plant go through the site. Problem where I'm at is it's sunny about 35% of the time vs. say Denver.
But solar is so sexy and green. But in 20 years the panels are junk and then what do you do with them?
Too many of these writers think meat comes from the back room of the supermarket and just because you can plug your Tesla in the juice justs magically appears. The huggers shut down new transmission lines but don't understand why they're unable to plug their IPhone in and charge it up because of the rolling blackout.
Yes, my utility went "green". Built wind farms 300 miles away from the market. You were able to buy this "green" energy for 50% more to feel good. But it's hip to be green. Think of the power loss over that 300 miles though.

You make very good points. I'm not a huge fan of solar myself (for exactly the reasons you stated), nor NIMBYism. But let's not pretend there's no power loss for natural gas, or other fossil fuels. There is a "chimney" in the middle of the road 1/4 mile from my house where PSEG installed it to vent a natural gas leak, one of thousands that are KNOWN in NJ currently but on a waiting list to fix (and new leaks appear every day/week--those buried iron pipes aren't getting any younger, nor replaced.

Really the answer is nuclear. No other "green" energy can touch its capacity. But that's never going to happen.

Paul Pollets

The article does not mention the parasitic load of a 20-40amp circuit for the compressor, or what that load really means to the overall usage of energy.

ethicalpaul

My570 said:

They're not so great when they're aimed at your house at less than 20 ft blowing cold air at you during the winter and hot air during the summer
... and less than 10' from the vehicles parked in our private driveway.. except for my old work car that I parked about a foot in front of that Wind Machine... I'm looking for a van now.. the car isn't tall enough.. 

This made me smile a bit. I installed my mini split (which I admittedly use almost exclusively for cooling) compressor on the side of my house, next to my driveway, and yes about 10 feet from my neighbor's driveway and 20 feet from his house. But I have been out there while it's running and even on hot days it doesn't put out much of a blast. The neighbor's house definitely doesn't feel it.

But the best answer to that is vertical well, closed loop ground-source heat pumps. And they even work through the dead of winter in the bitter northeast, @Jamie Hall. There is an up-front cost but they run and run and run. The compressor is indoors, greatly reducing the maintenance requirements.

ethicalpaul

Paul Pollets said:

The article does not mention the parasitic load of a 20-40amp circuit for the compressor, or what that load really means to the overall usage of energy.

What is the parasitic load of a compressor circuit? Do you mean when the compressor is off?

Jamie Hall

Totally agree with @ethicalpaul 's comment on nuclear -- but you all knew that about me anyway.

The still unanswered question -- no one wants to go there -- is what do you do about legacy hot water and steam systems? There are a lot of them out there. A lot. And there are two little problems about replacing them. First, no one has come up with a heat pump which will manage either higher temperature hot water systems, never mind steam, so mandating heat pumps is essentially condemning all that legacy built environment since the cost of conversion would be astronomical. Second, even supposing that you do come up with such a critter and can figure out how to get the general public, through taxes, to pay for the conversions, who is going to update the grid -- it doesn't matter whether it's in a city or miles out in the country -- to handle the power load? As I type this, Cedric is running full bore (it's 5 F with a 20 mph wind). That translates to 500 amperes on a 240 volt circuit. If we assume that someone comes up with a heat pump (for steam) with a COP of 2.5 at those temperatures, that comes down to a still unreasonable 200 amperes.

Will someone please put some good, thorough engineering thought into all this? Before the politicians come up with impossible to meet mandates? Yeah... good luck with that.

ethicalpaul

I think there is benefit in increasing their use in new construction and in full renovation situations (we see plenty of former steam gut renos getting gas forced air here--many of those could be heat pumps), while still having fossil fuel systems in those houses that wouldn't be a good fit. Reasonable folks like the author of that article are not advocating to replace everything today.

But on the other end of the spectrum, there are people who are strongly opposed to the idea of things such as limiting gas installations in new construction in moderate climates, and I just can't understand that thinking.

SlamDunk

if Bill Gates has his way, we will have more nuclear- And we should!

Jamie Hall

ethicalpaul said:

I think there is benefit in increasing their use in new construction and in full renovation situations (we see plenty of former steam gut renos getting gas forced air here--many of those could be heat pumps), while still having fossil fuel systems in those houses that wouldn't be a good fit. Reasonable folks like the author of that article are not advocating to replace everything today.

But on the other end of the spectrum, there are people who are strongly opposed to the idea of things such as limiting gas installations in new construction in moderate climates, and I just can't understand that thinking.

Completely agree, @ethicalpaul . Problem is... there are a lot of quite unreasonable folks out there, and they are popular. And they worry me.

Heat pumps in gut renos or new construction in moderate climates? Absolutely -- no good reason not to use them. I would. I would also provide enough standby power to run them when the grid goes paws up, too, though. Oops... that nowadays means fossil fuels -- or big battery banks. Well, I'd probably do that, too. Big battery banks I mean...

ethicalpaul

if I had a magic wand I'd find a way to take the money that was spent on backup power and put that into making the grid more reliable.

But lacking that...lots and lots of houses today with gas or oil have no way to run it when the power goes down, so I don't see this as a difference between them and heat pumps

Of course, nothing can beat steam for ability to keep working with very minimal backup power, one of the reasons we all love it!

bucksnort

ethicalpaul said:

I think there is benefit in increasing their use in new construction and in full renovation situations (we see plenty of former steam gut renos getting gas forced air here--many of those could be heat pumps), while still having fossil fuel systems in those houses that wouldn't be a good fit. Reasonable folks like the author of that article are not advocating to replace everything today.

But on the other end of the spectrum, there are people who are strongly opposed to the idea of things such as limiting gas installations in new construction in moderate climates, and I just can't understand that thinking.

Have you read the UN Agenda 2021 or 2030? People are destroying the world and need to be controlled. Anyone living outside the city collective is a detriment because the need to service the home on 5 acres is not efficient use of the collective effort. They want you to live in a controlled setting. You should not have a car. You shall live in a multi person building. My 1/2 acre lot in town is inefficient use of the collectives resources and should have 6 housing units on that 1/2 acre. You will own nothing and like it. Gates might like nuclear but he also believes in population control.

bucksnort

Zman said:

I am really liking The Atlantic.
I just finished reading this one https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/02/how-public-health-messaging-backfired/618147/ when @ethicalpaul posted this well written piece.

I'm really disturbed at all the so called "journalists" that are now medical experts. Anything to make a buck I guess. Greta is considered a climate expert. LOL

ethicalpaul

bucksnort said:

Have you read the UN Agenda 2021 or 2030? People are destroying the world and need to be controlled. Anyone living outside the city collective is a detriment because the need to service the home on 5 acres is not efficient use of the collective effort. They want you to live in a controlled setting. You should not have a car. You shall live in a multi person building. My 1/2 acre lot in town is inefficient use of the collectives resources and should have 6 housing units on that 1/2 acre. You will own nothing and like it. Gates might like nuclear but he also believes in population control.

That's a pretty extreme view which you are of course entitled to. But nowhere have I seen anyone advocating for anything like that. What I have seen is a bit of an opposite thing where people make multi-unit housing outright illegal, or mandate a certain number of parking spaces for some development.

If someone comes to try to remove you from your lot that you own so they can build an apartment building, I'll be the first one to come to your assistance. I don't expect that to happen, and I expect that you don't really either.

bucksnort

ethicalpaul said:

bucksnort said:

Have you read the UN Agenda 2021 or 2030? People are destroying the world and need to be controlled. Anyone living outside the city collective is a detriment because the need to service the home on 5 acres is not efficient use of the collective effort. They want you to live in a controlled setting. You should not have a car. You shall live in a multi person building. My 1/2 acre lot in town is inefficient use of the collectives resources and should have 6 housing units on that 1/2 acre. You will own nothing and like it. Gates might like nuclear but he also believes in population control.

That's a pretty extreme view which you are of course entitled to. But nowhere have I seen anyone advocating for anything like that. What I have seen is a bit of an opposite thing where people make multi-unit housing outright illegal, or mandate a certain number of parking spaces for some development.

If someone comes to try to remove you from your lot that you own so they can build an apartment building, I'll be the first one to come to your assistance. I don't expect that to happen, and I expect that you don't really either.

That isn't my view. It's a valid published policy put out by experts at the UN. It's no secret. This is their plan to save the World. Read Keto vs. New London. They have unlimited resources at the point of force to remove you. Thanks for the offer of help but how big is your Army? It's called "Best use of the land" which translates into what generates the most taxes from that piece of land.
Not too long ago California in all their wisdom wanted to mandate ALL chain saws WOULD be equipped with catalytic convertors to save the World. Problem with that is it would add substantial weight to the tool.
Not much of a problem to Fred cutting down the mulberry bush in the yard but to the guys fighting forest fires it is big deal. The fire eaters told them if you mandate this and who is going to fight the fires as we aren't hauling around 50% heavier saws. This plan to save the World did cross over into as an example your lawnmower/snowblower etc. Stuff runs like crap because it's leaned down to nothing.

ethicalpaul

Like I said, when they come for your house, give me a holler, if only just to say "see, I told you so"

Jamie Hall

Lots of things I could put down... but won't. I'm with @ethicalpaul , though, and I'd suggest for the size of his Army, and the spirit, look up one the Rev. Lt. JG Howell M. Forgy, USN, and the USS New Orleans. There were men in those days, and they weren't a git confused.

JUGHNE

Doctor Zhivago thought he owned his own house, until after the People's revolution.

ethicalpaul

OK but was his boiler oversized?

JUGHNE

He burned his furniture and went out at night to steal wood for heating.

ethicalpaul

So that's a "yes"?

JUGHNE

Yes..... probably the cause of the revolution

archibald tuttle

I spent a fitful night made only slighly less insomnolent by the knowledge that those here have a basic knowledge of engineering and would understand the limitations carefully elided by these elite partisan sirens at the Atlantic. This is the worst kind of fake news because it is true without telling the truth. Perhaps the most offhanded decontextualized example of bull being spread: "even gas-burning furnaces require electricity to work, making those appliances no less unreliable if the power goes out for an extended time".

Anyone who takes that seriously isn't really thinking about how to deal with disruptions to the grid. Of course it is true so far as it goes, but I can run my gas boilers with the alternator on my car and an inverter (and indeed have carefully prepared them with cutout switches and shore plugs to do so) nevermind the smallest honda generator you can carry with one hand or the more serious automotive co-option option of hybrid as generator (there is a link over the previous text but in my browser it only shows up if i hover over it) marveled at to the extent that it has gone viral when anybody with a half a brain understood that significant generation is at the core of hybrid tecnology.

Try that with your stinking heat pump. The Ford with the fully optioned power port can output 7500 watts and thus could power most residential and even decent sized commercial fossil fuel heating systems on the planet while it would struggle with the starting load of a 4 Ton heat pump. What is happening with heat pumps is a coercive utopian plot we've seen in the Matrix, simply substituting the grid. The entire premise of the article is to push people away from the independence of their current lifestyles and make them dependent upon the grid (to be fair propane and oil are independently stored like one hell of fricking battery but Natural Gas puts you also on a grid, albeit a competing grid somewhat less subject to disruption). One doesn't need a totalitarian government at that point because you have to do submit to whatever becomes required to maintain your connection, paying for your neighbors solar cells, paying for the access of those deemed in need, paying for the rent seeking companies to put absurdly expensive windmills off the cost . . . any of these could be worthy pursuits (perhaps doubtful in the latter case but for those who want to pay 4 times as much for power in the name of their conception of climate) but they no longer need to attract your individual fealty and contribution.

Yes @bucksnort is extreme, extremely sensible.

All that said, heat pumps are incredible technology. Why not let them do what they are good at instead of pretending they are the silver bullet to climate change. They only and they make a lot of sense but not without a backup plan as Texas learned in its own version of the valentine's day massacre. If you look at load profile in Texas you will see that heat pumps are anything but peak shaving technology which is the major current purpose of "demand management subsidies" as practiced by utilities.



Instead of a steady or arithmetic increase in consumption with falling temperature, resistance backup in cold gives geometric increase and added 50% to demand in Texas when it could least afford it. We've had this debate before and I never finished discussing with advocates of the technology, e.g. @TAG , whether heat pump technology can meet the expectations of heating consumers without backup but there is plenty of evidence it doesn't do so at this time (also a link here which doesn't show up unless you hover at least on my computer, this is an extensive write up of peak demand debates at a southern utility driven by backup resistance heat for heat pumps. When they start installing these as a matter of course without resistance backup I will think the technology a bit more mature, whether that means it can truly keep up or whether the expectation is that consumers would be better off with their homes in the 50s for a week than in the 15s and they are , you know, informed.

And as to what even makes sense, why would we push for a big installed based of heat pumps at this point. It's one thing if the economics of not paying for a fossil backup dictate heat pumps on their own in some climates with those who install heat pumps pay a rate for electricity that reflects the additional reserve capacity necessary (Texas, being the wild west and, in no small part because the greens prefer it and made a pact with the free market 'devils', has no capacity market that pays generators to be ready or pay the price of substitute energy if they are not) but why subsidizie it? Not the least bit of suspicion or actual analysis in this article, not the least of which might look at what are the actual efficienies of fossil heat vs. heat pump (obviously if you are replacing resistance heat there is a savings but we have relatively little resistance heat in America. Once coal heavy england is heavy on resistance heat so the overall demand fares better vis-a-vis shifts to heat pumps but not the peaks and they will regret abandoning coal baseload at the margins like those seen in Texas.

It is hard to look at the average acheived heat rate of electric generation in the US or US regions but it is fairly easy to look at the heat rate by fleet and, as can be seen in Texas, the current policy posture has us mostly relying on gas turbines which are around 11,000. So you notice this beautiful chart that seems to say that heat pumps are more efficient at most heat rates in many places, except most places don't acheive those heat rates under 10,000 and won't, especially at times of high heating demand for decade[s], by which time any heat pump you put in is going to be past its useful life. It may be in 20 or 25 years these will make a lot of sense in even broader climate zones, and they make sense today if used where air conditioning is desired and fossil backup for heat in teens and under (at during power loss).



This chart is with 80% fossil heating equipment and 8.2 HPSF. Of course we know the latest heat pumps can do well better as can the latest furnaces (although don't get me started on subsidies for condensing boilers with non condensing emitters as "demand management" on the gas grid. Indeed we've got a great thead going on on spurious turbulence noise in a Knight that has a delta of all of 5 degrees and i'm betting not yielding a drop of condensate. Not to cast aspersions, I can't see any radiant manifolds in the near boiler piping on display although perhaps they are remote and the returns are really below 135 even at 5 degree delta, albeit 1/2" to zones so maybe i case aspersions. I know noise is bothersome, but the condensing operation question would be bothering me more. Well, I digress. The point is we can get more efficiency from fossil fuel, especially in gas furnaces (much as i'm chagrined to admit it) just as the heat pump fleet will roll to more efficiency. And, of course those charts don't report on cost, just relative heat rate efficiency. Cost is an even more stark measure where you save greatly in northern states with fossil and only modestly in southern states with heat pump - and yet states like Maine are subsidizing heat pumps. We live in a world of insanity over climate. I don't contend there is nothing to climate arguments but I believe they are drastically overstated and, even if they were not, we have no effective solutions other than undermining the quality of life of those least able to afford it and should fund x-prizes for solving choke points in alternatives rather than this gross rent-seeking merry goround of affirmative action subsidies for marginal immature technologies and/or use of mature technologies in marginal contexts.




sorry, here is the link to the paper with those heat rate and cost comparison charts.

archibald tuttle

JUGHNE said:

He burned his furniture and went out at night to steal wood for heating.

who wouldn't to keep Julie Christie warm . . .

TAG

It's the Atlantic.

A robust electric grid powered by hydro -- feeding .04KW electric. Why use anything else? My guess is straight resistance is still cheaper vs other sources. But -- how many places have that? TVA maybe

Was surprised at the rebates and programs in Maine .. and especially MA for heat pumps. The programs make installing them almost mandatory. Own two homes in NJ -- to receive the full benefit of the "Clean Energy" program you have to use a heat pump. Carrier even makes special units in the 5 speed line to hit the requirements. Mini-splits will also get you there. The program is very tempting --- 5k rebate and 10k for 10 years at 0%. ...... you get 15k free for $88 dollars a month. We save that much over the year in both places -- 15k for free

How many HP are spinning around in NJ today at 28 degrees? .... who knows. But, NG is still going to be cheaper. I run my one HP system (carrier zoned) -- to modulate and equalize the temps in the house. It's all radiant and panels connected to a NG a boiler. It does not run very often -- but it's nice to bump it up for 1/2 hour in the AM. My other place has a Carrier zoned furnace -- the HP is never used ... they are both older places w/ odd additions .... so we have mini-splits as well.

We also have a place in PA and building another that will be our residence when I retire in a few years. PA has almost nothing available. In PA it's oil/propane. Sort of annoying since we have a huge NG pipeline 1/2 mile away feeding NJ with all of PA's NJ gas. You have to have a HP with propane ...

It's really just math. The Carrier 5 speed had no problem heating my NJ house when under construction (no boiler) -- we had temps in the low single digits. No backup heat and I was as a bit worried -- but, it had no problem running down to zero. It's rated down to 2 degrees.

Can see how TX would have a huge problem w/ older HP's and resistance heat. Just when the grid is needed most -- it's not able to handle the huge load from the resistance. I'm sure the same thing happens in SC and other states when cold comes through. My brother moved there a few years ago and did two of the new Bosch units ... we have been looking at condos on the beach and they all have older basic heat pumps that need the resistance backup under 40 degrees.

The solar credits and rebates. Seems we could do better using the money other places. Could not even do solar in PA it as the grid can not take any more "return" electric. At full cost rebate by the way ..... so those w/o solar not only pay to subsidies the install .. we pay to subside the grid and any wasteful use in the persons house.

archibald tuttle

@TAG no problem heating your house down to zero returning what indoor temperature and never going on resistance? I know many contractors who like them for work and find them super easy to get in to a house that is gutted including the central heat, but they don't care if there is a day it is in the 50s in the house.

MAybe you have the latest latest, but ck out the link to the planning engineer on how resistance heat backup is the tail wagging the dog for peak winter loads. If people get that in a climate like Texas a heat pump makes a lot of sense but you might need to bundle up a week a year, maybe you would have something. But consumer expectations are not cast in those terms. Further, whatever temp it was able to produce satisfactory heat at the day it came out the box is going to change over the life of the system, minor refrigerant lost, corrison and debris in the outdoor heat air to air heat exhanger , corrosion and debris in the water to water or water to air heat exchanger of geothermal burial systems.

I'm not knocking these systems but you look at the marginal savings even in the theoretically advantageous zones and you wonder why we aren't selling them with fossil backup and subsidizing the back up installation as a peak shaving measure rather than subsidizing the heat pump which is supposed to confer a cost advantage on its own.

TAG

Arch - The Carrier 5 speed unit using the Toshiba rotary compressor has no problem putting out the rated amount of heat at its design. They also make what is called a "Greenspeed" with even better low temp numbers ...... it uses a variable speed Scroll compressor. The VS Scroll is used in many makes. Carrier now makes a full variable speed rotary unit that looks to be priced and has numbers above the Greenspeed.

It really just math. While I may be doing old building rehabs -- I'm also using spray foam and paying attention to overall efficiencies. I have no problem w/ 1ksf per ton in PA for AC ... it would be math after that as to what BTU for heat. Carrier has a formula -- but, it's never above one extra ton. So in some climates to get the heat .... the AC is going to be oversized in some buildings.

Have used the Carrier stuff since 2006 -- no skin in the game with them. They have a very nice zoning system and I always zone my projects. I did look into Trane this time as my installer said they now have an equal zoning system -- but they don't have the varied VS systems that Carrier did. They only sell the full VS Scroll unit.

My new house uses a 3T carrier unit .... had the installers get me the same unit that is in my NJ places. This unit is a 3T in a 4T case ... while the output is about the same. It's really designed to provide a bit more heat efficiencies in the band of temps that we see in the Mid-Atlantic -- it's rated at 37k BTU. This new house has radiant from a propane boiler ..... In the shoulder seasons I'm not going to turning on the radiant. This unit is a good fit. In a well insulated house it's just a question of math and what you are willing to spend on equipment. On my NJ house with the existing radiant I just replaced the old air handler with the new heat pump. On this new house I actually installed a propane furnace as well -- complete overkill .... but the small added cost gives me another option.

But -- I know people with new houses in my area that only have electric. The heat pumps have no problem keeping the house warm w/o using backup. You have to have them set correctly and not use any more setback than allowed -- otherwise they will use the resistance to recover.

archibald tuttle

@TAG so, if i'm reading you right, everything going right with the very latest most expensive technology these can work. That's fair as far as it goes. Carrier itself says could be a good choice "if temps don't go below freezing much". You know what you are doing in running them and have fossil back up which could be overkill as you have neighbors who seem to do OK without. Looks like models with greenspeed are in the 20.5 and 23.5 SEER range which is up there on the air con side and the higher equates to 13 on the HPSF side. With variable I feel like you are getting turn down and more efficiency under low demand like a modulating boiler but I have to stop and think how that variable speed capability relates to cold weather performance if really all that is varying is the amount of refigerant pumped, not its condensation and evaporation points, but maybe couple with a smart metering valve . . . ? I can't seem to drill down in carriers stuff to anything for contractors. i just keep getting circled back to consumer brochures so i was trying to look at models and see how they are priced, rated, etc.

Maybe without numbers, are we talking 50% or 100% more than the run of the mill stuff mid teens SEER (which could be worth it for the performance, i'm trying to actually make a recommendation to someone on a system for a 3 season home that only has to prevent freeze ups over the winter so I think a heat pump without resistance (or with that feature disabled) would be fine.

I'm certainly willing to have my mind changed about the current state of things. And you are zoning refrigerant to several indoor emitters? In some senses I almost feel like there is often a case for several systems, but if the unit itself is prohibtively expensive but not marginally that much more for more tons , then maybe the costly multiple interior zones are still more cost effective.

In any event, it does seem like we have a fairly large installed heat pump base that is either not capable or not operated to minimize use of resistance heat in cold weather and texas had what it considers a cold week the entire second week in february with ramping demand before it hit the single digits on the weekend. Maybe its just math, but it doesn't seem to me that math is getting done as to actual field installations vs. the highest nameplate efficiency–see, e.g. condensing boiler replacements subsidized for homes with emitters that don't portend much condensing. Houses built or reworked to take advantage of them with more emitter of whatever sort, they can be really effective; but don't see it much around here where the largest installed base is baseboard designed for 180 degree water as the LCD.

Careful insulation and tightening is still the best way to improve and fossil fuel the most reliable way to heat around here and we have a long way to go before we have to worry about tight building syndrome on the housing stock we've got around here. But I'm looking forward to pairing some heat pumps with systems around here, especially in shoreside locations where the deepest cold is mitigated by the heat sink nearby.

But, in reading that article I don't see as much about heat pumps or the fine points we are debating as about this plan that everybody should have everything on the grid which is a really stupid eggs in one basket approach from my perspective favored by the greens because they are heavily engaged in saying what can happen on the grid. and carrying water with stupid remarks about interruptions in reliability suggesting that your fossil fuel will go out just like your heat pumps.

brian

TAG

While all the heat pumps have become "better" to be only "heat pump" heat source in a cold climate you are looking at one of the better units in any of the makers line. Yes, they are more money.

Most people will install back up strips -- just to be on the safe side. As I said above -- the extra cost of getting the very best unit in the Carrier line was not required for my projects. Even if I was in a situation where the electric HP was cheaper than propane boiler .... I'm not going to be using the HP in really cold weather ... when I have the comfort of a full radiant heated building. I had though of an air to water heat pump and also geo ....could not find any air to water and the wells for Geo in my area were crazy expensive.

The Carrier units are conventional split ducted type systems -- they have electric backup available if desired. Have also used both multi and single mini-splits ... no back up available with them. Each have a place.

Knock on wood -- I have never had any of them require servicing ... including a very old LG unit in a small guest cabin ... that's pushing 15 years.

kenjohnson

bucksnort said:

But in 20 years the panels are junk and then what do you do with them?

The panels are not junk in 20 years. They have a useful life according to accountants that is 20 years, after which they are fully depreciated. This is different than them not working after 20 years and being junk.

Your house has an accounting life of 27.5 years or 40 years, depending on the depreciation schedule you select if you were to rent it out - it's also not junk after that period of time.

Jamie Hall

At some risk of being obnoxious... I completely agree with the use of heat pumps -- if you are looking at new construction or a gut rehab, and if you can afford units which will operate down to whatever your minimum outdoor temperature is (not design here, folks, minimum. There's a difference).

However, as I've said before... on the enormous amount of legacy construction, particularly New York area and northeast, who is going to pay for it? Just for an example -- suppose I have a three floor plus half basement walkup in New York. Steam heat. Rent controlled. Now someone says I must spend x tens of thousands of dollars to rip out the steam and put in heat pumps which can maintain the legal 75 on a design day? I've heard it said government subsidy -- but that just shifts the cost to some other poor sucker. Or I can get an interest free loan... but how do I pay for that?

The dreams are wonderful. For many people, in many parts of the country, they may work. For a lot of people in other parts of the country they just plain don't.

ethicalpaul

I’ve seen this argument but it’s a straw man I believe. No one, least of all the guy in that article, has said:

Now someone says I must spend x tens of thousands of dollars to rip out the steam and put in heat pumps which can maintain the legal 75 on a design day? 

All he said was “if you want to do something to get off of fossil fuels, look at heat pumps.”

I heard another interesting story today. If you like gas, great, but watch out that you and your family aren’t getting played by a petro-marketing drone on nextdoor.com pretending to be an actual person:

https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/otm/segments/fight-over-natural-gas-stoves-are-wedge-issue-on-the-media