real experience with all electric

JakeCK

Jamie Hall said:

I thought, just for the sake of amusement, to think about... heating a bit. Over the course of the last 80 years or so, I've had occasion to live in and care for residences -- mostly houses, a condo and an apartment -- with various heating sources, and come to have some opinions. All personal, for what they're worth. Wood heat (stoves): this is young person's game. It's very satisfying and pleasant-- to come in on a cold winter night to a nice hot wood stove is wonderful. But it is a young person's game, unless you par someone else to cut, stack, season, split, and deliver your wood. Forced hot air: simple in principle. Unsatisfying in terms of feeling "warm" unless the thermostat is cranked well up there. Gravity hot air: like forced hot air, but a good bit harder to control (that was powered, by the way, by a coal fired furnace) Electric resistance (baseboards): the easiest to install and care for, lends itself to room by room control. Very very pricey in much of the US to run. Heat pump: the jury is still out (just installed this summer. Sorry. Let yet you know later). Forced hot water: Fussy, but easy to control if done right. Good comfort with radiators, so so with baseboards (I've had both) Gravity hot water: incredibly simple and reliable, but hard to control. Very comfortable. Passive solar: hard to control, but very comfortable and simple. Lowest running cost (like... zero) And last: STEAM! I've never yet found a heat source as comfortable to be around (except wood stoves). Simple, reliable. Much my favourite. Fuels: wood, as noted above, is a young man's game. Coal -- I have no experience with automatic stokers. Hand firing is, again, a young man's game. Oil -- never had a supply problem as such (though I've hit a few somewhat unreliable suppliers). Gas -- where you can get it and it's reliable, nice. LP -- I'd not use in preference to oil, but it's generally simpler equipment. Price quite variable. Electricity -- electric rates are incredibly variable. If electricity is cheap, it's a pretty good energy source. If it's not, it's not.

How is steam less fussy than forced hot water? With steam just having the wrong pitch to some pipes can cause you to loose heat in parts of the building. 

Steam is a great medium to move energy with. Phase changes and such. To bad we don't have heat pump steamers. 

Jamie Hall

I should have been more exact --care in the initial installation for pipe pitch is essential -- although the tolerances are large. However, once that initial installation is done and the system is balanced through venting or valve adjustments, you're done (unless the building shifts... ). Maintenance, particularly, almost never upsets the system. At the end of the day, both steam and hot water have their fussy bits.

random12345

Jamie Hall said:

I thought, just for the sake of amusement, to think about... heating a bit.

Over the course of the last 80 years or so, I've had occasion to live in and care for residences -- mostly houses, a condo and an apartment -- with various heating sources, and come to have some opinions.

All personal, for what they're worth.

Wood heat (stoves): this is young person's game. It's very satisfying and pleasant-- to come in on a cold winter night to a nice hot wood stove is wonderful. But it is a young person's game, unless you par someone else to cut, stack, season, split, and deliver your wood.

Forced hot air: simple in principle. Unsatisfying in terms of feeling "warm" unless the thermostat is cranked well up there.

Gravity hot air: like forced hot air, but a good bit harder to control (that was powered, by the way, by a coal fired furnace)

Electric resistance (baseboards): the easiest to install and care for, lends itself to room by room control. Very very pricey in much of the US to run.

Heat pump: the jury is still out (just installed this summer. Sorry. Let yet you know later).

Forced hot water: Fussy, but easy to control if done right. Good comfort with radiators, so so with baseboards (I've had both)

Gravity hot water: incredibly simple and reliable, but hard to control. Very comfortable.

Passive solar: hard to control, but very comfortable and simple. Lowest running cost (like... zero)

And last: STEAM! I've never yet found a heat source as comfortable to be around (except wood stoves). Simple, reliable. Much my favourite.

Fuels: wood, as noted above, is a young man's game. Coal -- I have no experience with automatic stokers. Hand firing is, again, a young man's game. Oil -- never had a supply problem as such (though I've hit a few somewhat unreliable suppliers). Gas -- where you can get it and it's reliable, nice. LP -- I'd not use in preference to oil, but it's generally simpler equipment. Price quite variable. Electricity -- electric rates are incredibly variable. If electricity is cheap, it's a pretty good energy source. If it's not, it's not.

You probably heard of this already, but in case you haven't: https://nytimes.com/2021/11/05/world/europe/russia-nuclear-power-climate-change.html

For me this takes the cake. Nuclear district hot water heating. No boiler. No chimney. No venting. No water heater. Zero maintenance. It would be even better if it were steam instead.

I want to believe you're right about wood being a young person's game, but if someone is strapped for cash and paying $0.40+/kwh to run a heat pump in the middle of winter when the COP is significantly less than 3...I think that fireplace/stove is going to get used...I just put a wood pallet on my sidewalk not long ago, a young couple came by and the guy asked me if he could have it to burn as firewood...He probably has gas too...