Welcome! Here are the website rules, as well as some tips for using this forum.
Need to contact us? Visit https://heatinghelp.com/contact-us/.
Click here to Find a Contractor in your area.

Geothermal

Ken_40
Ken_40 Member Posts: 1,320
be well suited for "moderate" climes. Like heat pumps, they can be excellent choices in temperate zones. Conn. is borderline at best. The rock mountain may make the installed cost prohibitive.

With today's 94%+ efficient gas and oil boilers, the advantages of geo are challenged. The longevity of them is also considered to be a weak point.

Like micro-turbines, solar, wind and heat pumps, geo makes a large splash with regard to what may be, but too often becomes a very expensive installation, with results never meeting promised expectations. Should you get the "right" designer, installer and materials - it would be like winning the lottery. Somebody wins, but never you.

No one ever considers the maintenance required of any install. The more "exotic" the design, the fewer competent service personel and replacement parts will be available.

My first choice would be high quality oil or gas fired equipment, installed by a company who's been around a long time and can provide lots of newer and older job referals.

Your first job? CHECK OUT THE REFERALS!!!

Comments

  • elaine wolf
    elaine wolf Member Posts: 1
    geothermal heat

    I am about to undertake building my dream house in the Northeastern US (Connecticut). Our house would sit atop a small mountain, so geothermal heat as a source is coming to mind.
    Can anyone help with the pros and cons of utilizing this system for heating a house that would be about 4,000 s.f.?
    It would have a full basement built into the mountaintop.
  • Patrick Mullaney
    Patrick Mullaney Member Posts: 67
    what kind?

    Geothermal heat pump or geothermal for radiant heat? What will the water source be for the home - well water? If that is the case, you are potentially half way there for a geothermal system depending if you do an open loop versus a closed loop.

    More info please. Do you have a budget in mind?
  • Singh_4
    Singh_4 Member Posts: 21
    hold on

    Ground source heat pumps can work in all climates.
    I've read about installations in antartic, hard to get an oil delivery there.
    I have customer in copake , NY ( 20 minutes from CT) that have water to air system for the last 13 years , never cold, always comfortable and little maintenance. Just replace his domestic water heater which is also supplied by geo.
    Econar is a manufacturer in Minnesota, check out their website and the installations in Canada and Minnesota.
    Geo, is far more effcient than any 94% effcient gas boiler, the effciency can run into the 400-500% range, at point of use. Period. Couple that with radiant and you have the ultimate system.
    Build a tight well insulated home, good windows, passive solar orientation and go for your dream home.
  • GMcD
    GMcD Member Posts: 477
    It's the envelope....

    Geo-exchange systems can work anywhere as long as the load side energy balance, and the soil conductivity is all checked and balanced properly. That being said- the large part of your home comfort and energy efficiency is going to be a result of proper envelope design- high performance glass with exterior shading to keep the solar loads minimized but tuned to let in winter sun for passive heating, minimized thermal bridging, a good heat recovery ventilator system, and of course radiant heating and cooling. Read some of the material here:

    www.healthyheating.com

    Spend the $$ on the envelope and you save $$ on the geo-exchange system cost and on the energy costs for the life of the building.
  • Ken_40
    Ken_40 Member Posts: 1,320
    THAT'S the...

    quintessential response!

    It's ALL about the envelope! The way you heat and cool it - is almost moot, IF the basic structure is well planned!

    The heating/cooling system is far, far and away a distant second place "issue" regarding energy impact, compared to the heating/cooling design.

    If we have 20K of "fudge" in construction resources, it is nearly ALWAYS better spent on improving the envelope (floors, walls, windows/doors and roof), than leaning towards exotica forms of heating or cooling.

  • Ken_40
    Ken_40 Member Posts: 1,320
    Yes Singh,

    Geo can work anywhere. So can micro-turbines, nuclear and wood stoves.

    The issues are NOT limited to JUST heating and cooling. Domestic water heating, used 365 days a year, a support infrastructure, e.g., service, parts and the technical competency of those who are trained to work on such esoteric equipment, and product service life should never be discounted.

    The statement of the homesite, being stated as on bedrock, makes geo possible, but hardly conducive.

    Theoretically, geo is wonderful. But then, so is wind, etc. The true debate is not whether or not it can be done. The debate is: "is it practical" and "should they consider it as such"? In one word...

    "NO"
  • Craig R Bergman
    Craig R Bergman Member Posts: 100
    Misinformation

    Your post is full of misinformation.

    >>> well suited for "moderate" climes. Like heat pumps, they can be excellent choices in temperate zones. Conn. is borderline at best. The rock mountain may make the installed cost prohibitive. With today's 94%+ efficient gas and oil boilers, the advantages of geo are challenged. The longevity of them is also considered to be a weak point.

    Connecticut is NOT "borderline at best". Ground Source Heat Pumps are in operation from the Equator to the Artic Circle!! As far as rock drilling goes...In Iowa, a 150 foot vertical bore through rock will cost about 1,300/ton.
    It's hard to "challange" 360-480% efficiency compared to 95%. Longevity a weak point??? GET REAL!!! A Geo system will outlast ANY modern furnace with a lot LESS maintenance too!

    >>>Like micro-turbines, solar, wind and heat pumps, geo makes a large splash with regard to what may be, but too often becomes a very expensive installation, with results never meeting promised expectations. Should you get the "right" designer, installer and materials - it would be like winning the lottery. Somebody wins, but never you.

    WOW!!! Talk about a blanket statement. Well Ken...Geo can be expensive to install, but the long term savings are well worth the investment. We even have a program that GUARANTEES the promised savings! As with any HVAC system, you should have the "right" designer, installer and materials. When you do, EVERYBODY WINS!!!!

    >>>No one ever considers the maintenance required of any install. The more "exotic" the design, the fewer competent service personel and replacement parts will be available.

    Here's the maintenance required. 1)Clean the filter monthly 2) Have system checked for performance once a year. Ground Source Heat Pumps are not "exotic", they have been around for thirty years. The rising costs of Natural Gas, L.P. and Fuel Oil have made Geothermal competitive.
    In FACT...When building a new home, the cost of "ownership"
    is LESS with Geothermal than with ANY fuel based system.

    Bergy
  • Craig R Bergman
    Craig R Bergman Member Posts: 100
    More Misinformation

    >>>The statement of the homesite, being stated as on bedrock, makes geo possible, but hardly conducive.

    That depends on the cost to install the ground loop. Without that information, your statement is baseless.

    >>>Theoretically, geo is wonderful. But then, so is wind, etc. The true debate is not whether or not it can be done. The debate is: "is it practical" and "should they consider it as such"? In one word...

    "NO"

    There is no "theoretical". The principles that Geo operates under are FACT!! The home owner needs to look at the installed cost of VERY high efficient furnace and VERY high SEER A/C system compared to the Geo system. They then need to look at the operating cost of both and decide if the savings Geo offers are worth it to them.

    Bergy

  • Dave_4
    Dave_4 Member Posts: 1,405
    Efficiency

    "It's hard to "challange" 360-480% efficiency compared to 95%."

    No one cares about efficiency when talking about different fuel sources. If oil were free, I couldn't care less if I only had 1% efficiency. What are the dollar savings? After all, the purpose of increasing efficiency is to save money.
  • Craig R Bergman
    Craig R Bergman Member Posts: 100
    Elaine...

    It is VERY important to find an accredited Geothermal Designer/Installer. Geothermal can not be installed by "Rules of Thumb". You can find them at IGSHPA. (International Ground Source Heat Pump Association)
    www.igshpa.okstate.edu

    In Iowa, any homeowner NOT installing Geo in a new home is NUTS!!! Why?? Because the cost of ownership is less.
    Lets use the following as an example...

    A WELL built 2,000 SqFt ranch home with 1,600 SqFt finished basement. 45,556 Btu/Hr for heating. 32,000 Btu/Hr
    for cooling. Natural Gas cost $1.15/ccf. Electric cost $0.09/Kwh. -5 Deg and 95 Deg design temps.

    Our EO48(4 Ton) Geo system and TWIN 40 Gal electric water heaters would cost $246.00 to heat the home, $88.00 to cool the home and $254.00 to make hot water for the home.
    Total cost: $587.00/year or $48.92/month.

    A 50,000 BTU furnace, 13 SEER A/C and 40,000 BTU water heater would cost $1,149.00 to heat the home, $205.00 to cool the home and $376.00 to make hot water for the home.
    Total cost: $1,730.00/year or $144.17/month

    That's $1,143/year or $95.25/month savings. The added cost of the geo system for this home was $8,126.00(After Rebates of ($1,350.00) That's about a seven year payback.

    To finance $8,000.00 @ 6% adds about $45.00/month
    the Geo saves $95.25/month. This home gives it's owner a POSITIVE cash flow of $50.25 EVERY MONTH!

    I hope this helps;

    Bergy
  • Craig Bergman
    Craig Bergman Member Posts: 84
    If oil were free...

    But it's not. Fossil fuel costs will remain volatile and subject to market forces beyond the consumers control.
    It is that volatility, concerns about the environment, CO poisoning and low interest rates driving the surge in Geothermal systems.

    Electric rates in Iowa are about $0.09/KWh. I would have to purchase natural gas at about $0.32/Therm to equal the operating cost of Geothermal. That, is saving money.

    Bergy
  • Wayne_16
    Wayne_16 Member Posts: 130
    geo thermal

    Way to go Craig, a very good illistration of the benefits of using geothermal.

    Wayne
  • Patrick Mullaney
    Patrick Mullaney Member Posts: 67
    ourcoolhouse.com

    Go here and spend the time to carefully read and digest an awesome success with a Geothermal system depolyed for radiant heat. My system is water-to-air with a domestic hot water loop - just installed. The information contained on this site will further convince you that geothermal is an excellent choice.

    I will agree that finding the right contractor/installer who has experience with these systems is paramount to success. There is the Geothermal Heat Pump Consortium and the International Ground Source Heat Pump Association to help you guide your selection process. I found my installer off the Waterfurnace site, but it took me 4 months to get him - well worth the wait.

    Like everything else in life, spend the time to interview and find the best, just like you would for a Pediatrician, lawyer, CPA, broker, or steam heat expert. There are knuckleheads everywhere!

    And, if you need the perfect example of geothermal success in a colder climate - go to Iceland.
  • Patrick Mullaney
    Patrick Mullaney Member Posts: 67
    can you do this for me??

    Craig - great analysis! Can you do this for my home?? I know I made the right decision, but have not been able to figure out how right....the first electric bill has not arrived yet.
  • dana_3
    dana_3 Member Posts: 57
    geo thermal

    there is a company out of central Mass, thats been doing geo thermal for 25+ years. one of the smartest men you will ever meet. send me a reply i'll get you the ph#
  • Craig Bergman
    Craig Bergman Member Posts: 84
    Patrick

    There is an easy way to track your Geo cost.
    Grainger has a small digital hour meter, capable of operating with low voltage. Since our units are two stage plus electric backup strip heat, we use three hour meters.
    The wiring is simple. One side of all three hour meters are wired to "Common". The other side of the first hour meter is wired to Y1(First Stage), the second to Y2(Second Stage) and the third to W(Aux Heat).

    Record the voltage at the Geo unit. Record the Amp draw of the compressor on first and second stage and the electric strip. Then it's simple math. Volts X Amps = Watts...Watts X Hours = KWh
    The last one I did was as follows... 247 Volts 9.5 Amps (first stage) 11.5 Amps (second stage) 40 Amps (aux heat)$0.09/KWh.
    Remember, when the unit is in second stage, first stage is also calling. So when doing the math for second stage subtract the first stage Amp draw.(Instead of 11.5 Amps use 2 Amps). This will NOT track fan or pump costs, but it will get you Very close to your cost of operation.

    Example... 6 hours of first stage, 2.5 hours of second stage and 1 hour of aux heat.
    247v X 9.5a=2,346.5w (2.3465 kw) 2.3465 X 6=14.079KwH X .09=$1.27
    247v X 2a=494w (.494Kw) .494 X 2.5=1.235KwH X .09=$0.11
    247v X 40a=9880w (9.88Kw) 9.88 x 1=9.88KwH X .09=$0.89
    TOTAL COST...$2.27

    Bergy
  • Craig Bergman
    Craig Bergman Member Posts: 84




  • Ken_40
    Ken_40 Member Posts: 1,320
    Bergy?

    The huge added cost of a geo system over a "conventional" system, ground sink ineffectiveness when the ground loses its' thermal differential (documented to occur in under ten years in many apps.), the far better bang for the buck one can and should achieve by putting the excess costs of geo vs. "conventional" into the envelope, as well as the return one could and would garner from simply putting the excess costs of the geo into a humble 5% APR CD, thereby making conventional apparatus even more cost effective - is obvious.

    Citing the cost of Iowa's electric at 9-cents a KW is classic "selective" math - knowing the site is in Mass. The only thing that matters is the cost per KW at the actual job site. I'd bet you lunch the correct number for that area of Mass. is closer to 12-cents per KW, making all your "examples" off by 25% - which in turn makes your geo illustration less energy efficient, not more.
  • Patrick Mullaney
    Patrick Mullaney Member Posts: 67
    Is This Necessary??

    These are somewhat inflamatory remarks and am not sure are necessary is this exchange of information. Instead of challenging the individual's character and integrity, how a response as to why geothermal is less efficient or cost prohibitive over its lifespan? I for one would be interested in such an exchage as after the 6 months of research I conducted and the half a dozen or so references I spoke with, it was pretty clear that Geothermal was an excellent choice for my home. I will also say the first day the system went live, there was a significant change in the air quality and evenness of temperature in the house which we never had with out previous system (electric heat pump).

    But I digress - how about impart some knowledge baed on years of expertise versus accusing the man of being something he may not and therefore discounting his knowledge.

    DISCLAIMER - I do not know any person on this thread.
  • Craig R Bergman
    Craig R Bergman Member Posts: 100
    Ken

    > The huge added cost of a geo system over a

    > "conventional" system, ground sink

    > ineffectiveness when the ground loses its'

    > thermal differential (documented to occur in

    > under ten years in many apps.), the far better

    > bang for the buck one can and should achieve by

    > putting the excess costs of geo vs.

    > "conventional" into the envelope, as well as the

    > return one could and would garner from simply

    > putting the excess costs of the geo into a humble

    > 5% APR CD, thereby making conventional apparatus

    > even more cost effective - is obvious.

    >

    > Citing

    > the cost of Iowa's electric at 9-cents a KW is

    > classic "selective" math - knowing the site is in

    > Mass. The only thing that matters is the cost per

    > KW at the actual job site. I'd bet you lunch the

    > correct number for that area of Mass. is closer

    > to 12-cents per KW, making all your "examples"

    > off by 25% - which in turn makes your geo

    > illustration less energy efficient, not

    > more.

    >

    > Your "science" appears flawed by your

    > marketing only "basis." Could it be you work at

    > or for a geo-provider?

    >

    > There are four basic

    > forms of scribes here. Independent contractors,

    > homeowners, manufacturer/suppliers, and those who

    > try and act like contractors, who are in fact

    > manufactuere/suppliers, but who "pretend" to be

    > contractors or simply free thinking sages, who

    > "act" as such, but in fact are not. My word for

    > this practice is d-e-c-e-p-t-i-o-n.

    >

    > Could you

    > be the latter? If so, I for one would like to

    > know. Why? Because manufacturers/distributors

    > have a job to do, which unfortunately, equally

    > shares in a need to sell, as well as inform. And

    > far too frequently, the separation of those two

    > becomes blurred in favor of the sale - and at the

    > expense of accurate info.

    >

    > Your math is even

    > more flawed by comparing a furnace and electric

    > water heater to a hydronic system that does both

    > (makes hot water year round AND heats the home).

    > True, you can't get A/C from a hydronic

    > conventional system, but then you also failed to

    > mention the most important element of your

    > example, namely, the nature of the

    > envelope!

    >

    > The system used to heat, cool and

    > make d/h/w is interesting, but in brand new

    > construction (as is the operative here) the

    > envelope is EVERYTHING! Somehow, you failed to

    > even mention what the heat or cooling load

    > actually was for the 2,000 s.f. home in Iowa.

    > Granted, 4-tons is 48MBTU's. But so much other

    > data would be required to make a real analysis,

    > it seems a shame to leave out the truly essential

    > data you chose to omit?



    Let me make one thing PERFECTLY CLEAR. I am NOT in any way, shape or form a factory rep. I work for Air Comfort Inc. in Cedar Rapids, Iowa. Unlike you, I've not posted ANYTHING that is less than truthful!
  • Craig R Bergman
    Craig R Bergman Member Posts: 100
    Ken

    Let me make one thing perfectly clear. I am NOT in any way,shape or form a "Factory Rep". I work for Air Comfort Inc. in Cedar Rapids, Iowa. Unlike you, I've not posted ANYTHING that is less than truthful!! Having said that...

    You continue to post misinformation.
    >>>"ground sink ineffectiveness when the ground loses its' thermal differential (documented to occur in under ten years in many apps.)"<<< If the loop field is not properly designed and installed this can happen. it is however, RARE!!!
  • Craig R Bergman
    Craig R Bergman Member Posts: 100
    Ken

    > The huge added cost of a geo system over a

    > "conventional" system, ground sink

    > ineffectiveness when the ground loses its'

    > thermal differential (documented to occur in

    > under ten years in many apps.), the far better

    > bang for the buck one can and should achieve by

    > putting the excess costs of geo vs.

    > "conventional" into the envelope, as well as the

    > return one could and would garner from simply

    > putting the excess costs of the geo into a humble

    > 5% APR CD, thereby making conventional apparatus

    > even more cost effective - is obvious.

    >

    > Citing

    > the cost of Iowa's electric at 9-cents a KW is

    > classic "selective" math - knowing the site is in

    > Mass. The only thing that matters is the cost per

    > KW at the actual job site. I'd bet you lunch the

    > correct number for that area of Mass. is closer

    > to 12-cents per KW, making all your "examples"

    > off by 25% - which in turn makes your geo

    > illustration less energy efficient, not

    > more.

    >

    > Your "science" appears flawed by your

    > marketing only "basis." Could it be you work at

    > or for a geo-provider?

    >

    > There are four basic

    > forms of scribes here. Independent contractors,

    > homeowners, manufacturer/suppliers, and those who

    > try and act like contractors, who are in fact

    > manufactuere/suppliers, but who "pretend" to be

    > contractors or simply free thinking sages, who

    > "act" as such, but in fact are not. My word for

    > this practice is d-e-c-e-p-t-i-o-n.

    >

    > Could you

    > be the latter? If so, I for one would like to

    > know. Why? Because manufacturers/distributors

    > have a job to do, which unfortunately, equally

    > shares in a need to sell, as well as inform. And

    > far too frequently, the separation of those two

    > becomes blurred in favor of the sale - and at the

    > expense of accurate info.

    >

    > Your math is even

    > more flawed by comparing a furnace and electric

    > water heater to a hydronic system that does both

    > (makes hot water year round AND heats the home).

    > True, you can't get A/C from a hydronic

    > conventional system, but then you also failed to

    > mention the most important element of your

    > example, namely, the nature of the

    > envelope!

    >

    > The system used to heat, cool and

    > make d/h/w is interesting, but in brand new

    > construction (as is the operative here) the

    > envelope is EVERYTHING! Somehow, you failed to

    > even mention what the heat or cooling load

    > actually was for the 2,000 s.f. home in Iowa.

    > Granted, 4-tons is 48MBTU's. But so much other

    > data would be required to make a real analysis,

    > it seems a shame to leave out the truly essential

    > data you chose to omit?



    Let me make one thing perfectly clear. I am NOT in any way,shape or form a "Factory Rep". I work for Air Comfort Inc. in Cedar Rapids, Iowa. Unlike you, I've not posted ANYTHING that is less than truthful!! Having said that...

    You continue to post misinformation.
    >>>"ground sink ineffectiveness when the ground loses its' thermal differential (documented to occur in under ten years in many apps.)"<<< If the loop field is not properly designed and installed this can happen. it is however, RARE!!!
  • Craig R Bergman
    Craig R Bergman Member Posts: 100
    Ken

    Let me make this perfectly clear. I am NOT in any way, shape or form a "Factory Rep". I work for Air Comfort Inc. in Cedar Rapids, Iowa. Unlike you, I've not posted ANYTHING that is less than truthful and you continue to do so.

    Ground loop failure can occur...IF the loop field is not properly designed and installed. This is however, RARE!!
    I do agree that the "envelope" should be the first thing to be improved. We council our clients to do so. the better the "envelope" the smaller the Geo system and the lower the energy bills. Why would you want to put money into an account earning 5%. If, for example, a Geo system adds $10,000 and that earns 5% would that not be $500 a year?? My Geo example from an earlier post would SAVE the homeowner $1,143 a year. I don't know about you, but I would rather have $1,143.00 compared to $500.00.

    I cite $0.09 KwH because this is what I know. I do NOT pretend to know the rates around the country are. Even at $0.12/KwH you would have to purchase natural gas at $0.90/Therm to equal a Geo system with ONLY a 3.25 C.O.P.
    (Our units average 4.3 C.O.P.)

    If you would actually READ my previous post you will see that @ -5* the house requires 45,556 BTU/Hr for heat. @ 95* the house requires 32,000 BTU/Hr to cool. Furthermore, the previous home example is an ACTUAL home we have done.
    It is not numbers "picked" out of the air.

    Bergy
  • DanHolohan
    DanHolohan Member, Moderator, Administrator Posts: 16,601
    We're back

    to the "stupid stuff," Ken. No need to bully people.

    I grow weary.
    Retired and loving it.
  • jp_2
    jp_2 Member Posts: 1,935
    raccoons are raccoons

    no matter how many times you ask the raccoons to stay out of the garage cans, they always end up back at the garage.....
  • Patrick Mullaney
    Patrick Mullaney Member Posts: 67
    Solution

    we pulled the cans in the garage and shut the doors...
  • Perry_2
    Perry_2 Member Posts: 381
    Ken, and for others interested in Geothermal

    I researched geothermal for my house for several years.

    What I found was that the equipment was reliable, that there was an early history with improper sizing of the fields - but that some "old" systems with larger fields (20+ years) never had a problem; and most modern designers used sized field area from data from those "old" success stories (there were also lessons learned about which equipment worked and which didn't), and that there were several possible ways to look at total efficiency; and they all showed very substaintial cost payback when looking at 8 years or more (including maintenance). I do note that one of the potential savings in my case was the possibility of elimination of the natural gas meter - which saves about $150 per year in meter charges in my area (sans therm charges).

    Of course, installation was not cheap. $12,500 - $15,000 in my area and for my house.

    The only problem was in my case that I needed to reach a peak circulting water temp of 140F (or perhaps even 150F) with my installed cast iron baseboard. Unless I was going to use custom comerical equipment in a "one of a kind installation" that was not achievable with standard off the shelf systems. Thus, for me geothermal was not practical.

    I do note that I just paid a somewhat similar amount to install a Vitodens 200 and indirect water heater - but will have to pay $800 - $1000 per year (this is my expected heating bill based on a substaintial reduction in fuel usage with my Vitodens system - I paid over $1600 last year, cost estimate based on last years fuel cost) in natural gas usage versus spending $250 -$300 in electicity to operate a geothermal system.

    In the end, I found that a high quality geothermal system was priced comparable to a high quality mod/con system.

    The differences are that the geothermal system will have substaintially lower "fuel" bills and the equipment is known and demonstrated to be reliable. They are limited to 120 F heating water unless you go with custom components in a one of a kind system. The geothemal system can also be configured to provide air conditioning in the summer. The boilers can provide warmer water and no one really knows how reliable the current mod/con boilers will be. Boilers cannot be configured to provide air conditioning and I will have to retrofit in a separate air conditioning system in the future - at additional cost.

    I found it easier to find good experienced geothermal contractors (two willing to work with me in my area) than finding a heating contractor who understood mod/con boilers (did not find a single one in my area).

    If I didn't need 140 F water - all the advantages are on the geothermal side. Proven equipement and systems, proven very substaintially lower fuel cost, no need for another meter, and similar installation cost.

    Certainly - if I was building a new house I would consider nothing but geothermal - and our heating design temperature is -15 F for my area.

    I am not sure where you are getting your information, and suggest you check your sources.

    Perry
This discussion has been closed.