Please forgive me while I troll for a moment.....

Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when
leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch
up when I get home. I have a way of looking at the matter.
I'll explain my point of view after the argument is
underway.

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

On Oct 29, 8:22*am, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote:
Please forgive me while I troll for a moment.....

Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when
leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch
up when I get home. I have a way of looking at the matter.
I'll explain my point of view after the argument is
underway.

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
*www.lds.org
.

Yes, you save energy turning it down. In balance less heat is lost.

On Oct 29, 8:29*am, Frank wrote:
On Oct 29, 8:22*am, "Stormin Mormon"

wrote:
Please forgive me while I troll for a moment.....

Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when
leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch
up when I get home. I have a way of looking at the matter.
I'll explain my point of view after the argument is
underway.

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
*www.lds.org
.

Yes, you save energy turning it down. *In balance less heat is lost.

To elaborate, heat loss slows as the house cools (delta T is lower) so
it takes less energy to maintain the house at a lower temperature and
then heat it back up again. Especially so if the house is not well
insulated.

That said, I have not noticed any drop at all in my gas bills since
installing a programmable thermostat

nate

Stormin Mormon wrote:
Please forgive me while I troll for a moment.....

Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when
leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch
up when I get home. I have a way of looking at the matter.
I'll explain my point of view after the argument is
underway.

Well, according to the message I have gotten several times from
Oklahoma Natural Gas, turning down the thermostat 10 degrees for
8 hours per day will lower your bill by 10%. I'm not sure the
bill itself will go down that much since part of the bill is a
fixed rate operating cost, but the usage part should drop.
And if you can't believe the gas company who can you believe.

Bill

On Oct 29, 7:29*am, Frank wrote:
On Oct 29, 8:22*am, "Stormin Mormon"

wrote:
Please forgive me while I troll for a moment.....

Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when
leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch
up when I get home. I have a way of looking at the matter.
I'll explain my point of view after the argument is
underway.

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
*www.lds.org
.

Yes, you save energy turning it down. *In balance less heat is lost.


No, it takes too long to re-heat the boiler and all the water in the
pipes, radiators, and floor tubing. It is always best to set it once
and leave it there all winter. Too much energy is lost when all that
water is asked to re-heat all the surfaces again. For example when I
feel the return manifold from the coils under my concrete slab after
the slab was allowed to cool, the return water is ice cold, all that
energy to reheat the slab. No, bad asvice, best to keep it warm and
leave it there, saves tons of energy.

Stormin Mormon wrote:
Please forgive me while I troll for a moment.....

Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when
leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch
up when I get home. I have a way of looking at the matter.
I'll explain my point of view after the argument is
underway.

Hi,
Of course. You set it back for sure.

On Oct 29, 8:22*am, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote:
Please forgive me while I troll for a moment.....

Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when
leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch
up when I get home. I have a way of looking at the matter.
I'll explain my point of view after the argument is
underway.

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
*www.lds.org
.

I think it would depend on how long you are going to be out of the
house. I wouldn't turn it down if I am only out for an hour but if
your are going to be out for 8 hours it might be a good idea.

David

On Oct 29, 11:13*am, hibb wrote:
On Oct 29, 8:22*am, "Stormin Mormon"

wrote:
Please forgive me while I troll for a moment.....

Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when
leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch
up when I get home. I have a way of looking at the matter.
I'll explain my point of view after the argument is
underway.

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
*www.lds.org
.

I think it would depend on how long you are going to be out of the
house. I wouldn't turn it down if I am only out for an hour but if
your are going to be out for 8 hours it might be a good idea.

David

In terms of saving energy, the energy savings start as soon as the
house cools to the point that the heat would have come on had it not
been turned down. From that point on, you are saving energy.
Whether it makes enough difference to make it worthwhile depends on
how long it's turned down for.

If you turn it down to 62 overnight instead of 72 and it's 25 outside,
no question you are saving energy and that gas company estimate of
about 10% sounds in the ball park.

As someone already pointed out, the governing factor here is that the
rate of heat loss is directly proportional to the temp difference
between inside and out, at least excluding the heat loss due to actual
air leakage.

The only other issue that comes into play would be if there are
differing energy costs or different fuels involved. For example, if
you had a heat pump and electricity costs less at night than in the
morning, then that could easily negate the effect. Or if when you
set it back, in the morning a different fuel source kicks in during
recovery, etc.

No, it takes too long to re-heat the boiler and all the water in the
pipes, radiators, and floor tubing. It is always best to set it once
and leave it there all winter. Too much energy is lost when all that
water is asked to re-heat all the surfaces again. For example when I
feel the return manifold from the coils under my concrete slab after
the slab was allowed to cool, the return water is ice cold, all that
energy to reheat the slab. No, bad asvice, best to keep it warm and
leave it there, saves tons of energy.

We use warm water here to shower. I'd say that a higher % of people use
heat pumps or gas to heat rather than water. In your case, MAYBE it is
cheaper to leave it on, but I think you are only quoting yourself, and no
analytic studies by any testing agency. Can you find any said studies? I
don't doubt that you believe what you say is true, I just think that it is
not.

Steve

On Oct 29, 7:22*am, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote:
Please forgive me while I troll for a moment.....

Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when
leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch
up when I get home. I have a way of looking at the matter.
I'll explain my point of view after the argument is
underway.

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
*www.lds.org
.

My experiments say yes. We have 3 zones, and 2 are on setback
thermostats, these 2 parts of the house are the least used, so I use
extreme setback down to 50 on heat and up to 90 on AC. Still when we
use them the unit has kicked on so no inconvenience except on the
occasional trip through during the setback. My savings are well over
the 10% mentioned, and my propane man is getting upset, hardly worth
the stop anymore. (125 gal Feb thru October, mostly used to cook, heat
water, dry clothes. My electric bill is also down over 1/3. I started
this when energy prices spiked last year, and it has worked so well I
will continue. It takes a lot of BTUs to get a room to room
temperature after an extreme setback, but apparently not as many as
keeping it there.

RickH wrote:
On Oct 29, 7:29 am, Frank wrote:
On Oct 29, 8:22 am, "Stormin Mormon"

wrote:
Please forgive me while I troll for a moment.....
Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when
leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch
up when I get home. I have a way of looking at the matter.
I'll explain my point of view after the argument is
underway.
--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
Yes, you save energy turning it down. In balance less heat is lost.


No, it takes too long to re-heat the boiler and all the water in the
pipes, radiators, and floor tubing. It is always best to set it once
and leave it there all winter. Too much energy is lost when all that
water is asked to re-heat all the surfaces again. For example when I
feel the return manifold from the coils under my concrete slab after
the slab was allowed to cool, the return water is ice cold, all that
energy to reheat the slab. No, bad asvice, best to keep it warm and
leave it there, saves tons of energy.

I hope that you were just kidding because obviously you are wrong! Just
think for a minute.....if you were going to be gone for three months
don't you think you would save energy if you turned your thermostat
down? Well, the same would be true for a few hours, just not to the same
extent.

Stormin Mormon wrote:
Please forgive me while I troll for a moment.....

Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when
leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch
up when I get home. I have a way of looking at the matter.
I'll explain my point of view after the argument is
underway.




OK, let's have that point of view now.


Poll question:

How many guys here have wives who mistakenly think that when warming up
a cooled down house the rate of temperature increase of a typical home
heating system will be faster if they shove the thermostat setting all
the way up to 90F than if they just move it to the appropriate setpoint.

Then of course they forget to reset it when the place reaches a
comfortable temperature and wait for the man of the house to snarl, "Why
the hell is it so damn hot in here?"

And visa versa for A/C of course.

It can't just only happen to me. G

Jeff

PS, I realize there may be some HVAC systems which don't conform to the
above scenario, but they sure aren't in the majority around here.

--
Jeffry Wisnia
(W1BSV + Brass Rat '57 EE)
The speed of light is 1.8*10e12 furlongs per fortnight.

On Oct 29, 11:20*am, IGot2P wrote:
RickH wrote:
On Oct 29, 7:29 am, Frank wrote:
On Oct 29, 8:22 am, "Stormin Mormon"

wrote:
Please forgive me while I troll for a moment.....
Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when
leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch
up when I get home. I have a way of looking at the matter.
I'll explain my point of view after the argument is
underway.
--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
*www.lds.org
.
Yes, you save energy turning it down. *In balance less heat is lost.

No, it takes too long to re-heat the boiler and all the water in the
pipes, radiators, and floor tubing. *It is always best to set it once
and leave it there all winter. *Too much energy is lost when all that
water is asked to re-heat all the surfaces again. *For example when I
feel the return manifold from the coils under my concrete slab after
the slab was allowed to cool, the return water is ice cold, all that
energy to reheat the slab. *No, bad asvice, best to keep it warm and
leave it there, saves tons of energy.

I hope that you were just kidding because obviously you are wrong! Just
think for a minute.....if you were going to be gone for three months
don't you think you would save energy if you turned your thermostat
down? Well, the same would be true for a few hours, just not to the same
extent.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Yes, if I turned it down and left it there for a week or longer maybe.

But downturning for any period under a couple days and all the mass
you've spent heating once, now you have to re-heat over again. (my
system has several thousand feet of water tubing under both house
floor and garage slab zoned).

It might be different if you have forced air heat, but for water heat
(via radiators or radiant tube) every installer tells you "set it once
and forget it, the idea is to store heat".

On Oct 29, 10:36*am, "SteveB" wrote:
No, it takes too long to re-heat the boiler and all the water in the
pipes, radiators, and floor tubing. *It is always best to set it once
and leave it there all winter. *Too much energy is lost when all that
water is asked to re-heat all the surfaces again. *For example when I
feel the return manifold from the coils under my concrete slab after
the slab was allowed to cool, the return water is ice cold, all that
energy to reheat the slab. *No, bad asvice, best to keep it warm and
leave it there, saves tons of energy.

We use warm water here to shower. *I'd say that a higher % of people use
heat pumps or gas to heat rather than water. *In your case, MAYBE it is
cheaper to leave it on, but I think you are only quoting yourself, and no
analytic studies by any testing agency. *Can you find any said studies? *I
don't doubt that you believe what you say is true, I just think that it is
not.

Steve

Boiler installers never put daily "set back" thermostats on boilers,
only forced air systems get those, and they tell you to set the
thermostat once and leave it there.

The rules are completely different for radiant heated buidings vs air
heated buildings.

In an air heated building you heat the air, in a radiant heated
building you heat the building materials and that in turn heats the
people. When you lose all that stored energy it costs a fortune to
recover it back in boiler usage. There is nothing quite like the
warmth of a radiant-heated house.

On Oct 29, 7:22*am, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote:
Please forgive me while I troll for a moment.....

Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when
leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch
up when I get home. I have a way of looking at the matter.
I'll explain my point of view after the argument is
underway.

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
*www.lds.org
.

Is this for forced air furnace or boiler?

On Oct 29, 1:53*pm, jeff_wisnia
wrote:
Stormin Mormon wrote:
Please forgive me while I troll for a moment.....

Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when
leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch
up when I get home. I have a way of looking at the matter.
I'll explain my point of view after the argument is
underway.

OK, let's have that point of view now.

Poll question:

How many guys here have wives who mistakenly think that when warming up
a cooled down house the rate of temperature increase of a typical home
heating system will be faster if they shove the thermostat setting all
the way up to 90F than if they just move it to the appropriate setpoint.

Then of course they forget to reset it when the place reaches a
comfortable temperature and wait for the man of the house to snarl, "Why
the hell is it so damn hot in here?"

And visa versa for A/C of course.

It can't just only happen to me. G

Jeff

PS, I realize there may be some HVAC systems which don't conform to the
above scenario, but they sure aren't in the majority around here.

Heh.

Do you have any tips for properly instructing a user of a vehicle with
an automatic climate control system?

I *hate* getting in my old Porsche and driving along merrily and then
suddenly realizing that I'm sweating my cojones off. Takes me a while
to realize that the "thermostat" has been cranked up to some ungodly
temp. because when I was driving the car daily I think I maybe touched
the control twice a year...

nate

On Oct 29, 2:53*pm, jeff_wisnia
wrote:
Stormin Mormon wrote:
Please forgive me while I troll for a moment.....

Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when
leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch
up when I get home. I have a way of looking at the matter.
I'll explain my point of view after the argument is
underway.

OK, let's have that point of view now.

Poll question:

How many guys here have wives who mistakenly think that when warming up
a cooled down house the rate of temperature increase of a typical home
heating system will be faster if they shove the thermostat setting all
the way up to 90F than if they just move it to the appropriate setpoint.

Then of course they forget to reset it when the place reaches a
comfortable temperature and wait for the man of the house to snarl, "Why
the hell is it so damn hot in here?"

And visa versa for A/C of course.

It can't just only happen to me. G

Jeff

PS, I realize there may be some HVAC systems which don't conform to the
above scenario, but they sure aren't in the majority around here.

--
Jeffry Wisnia
(W1BSV + Brass Rat '57 EE)
The speed of light is 1.8*10e12 furlongs per fortnight.

The whole question and some of the answers, demonstrates the generally
poor knowledge of basic physics. Maybe that's our education system?

No wonder the Russians got a satellite into space first?
..
Obviuosly if the temperature of the inside of a house is lower there
will be less heat lost to outside. Because that's where it goes folks!
From inside the house to outside. Higher winds also help to conduct it
away.

If one left the house for a solid month with the heat turned to
minimum (or off, provided nothing froze up!) less heat would be used.
Whereas if the house is fully occupied heat turned to normal and with
doors opening and closing more heat will be lost to outside; all a
function of the temperature difference between outside and inside,
depending on your insulation and air exchanger, vents etc.

Where it gets confusing for some is that with the thermostat set
lower the whole interior of the house, walls, flooring, furniture,
appliances, books etc. etc. cool down to that lower interior house
temperature and it takes time and extra heat to bring them back up
whatever the occupants wants, after they get home.

But the' extra' heat is required only for so long as it takes for the
house temperature to 'catch up'. It depends on the thermal mass of the
house interior and it's contents. If one has a house constructed of
masonry or brick and/or with concrete floors/slab it will take longer
to bring temperature back up. A well insulated wood frame maybe less?

Conversely the next time the occupant leaves and turns the temperature
down less (or no) heating will be required as the house structure/
contents cool down. It will be nice and comfortable; with 'no one'
there, for quite a while.

Later the occupants return and will find the house chilly and that it
will take several hours for the house and it contents to warm up
again!

By the way. Lot of people confuse 'heat' (or absence of heat) with
'temperature', right?

Trying to explain to my neighbour that if we had three identical
blocks of material outside in the cold, (or even on a regular cool
day) one of concrete, one of metal and one of wood. They would all be
at the same temperature.

But if/when he picked them up the metal would 'feel' colder than the
wood. BECAUSE it would conduct HEAT away from his hand more quickly
than the others. Even though all are at the same TEMPERATURE.

Have fun.

"Stormin Mormon" wrote

Please forgive me while I troll for a moment.....

Hehe forgive while I feed the troll moment

Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when
leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch
up when I get home. I have a way of looking at the matter.
I'll explain my point of view after the argument is
underway.

Depends on how long you will be away and type of heating device used.
'Furnace' can be wood, coal, gas etc. I gather from the few with water
boiler systems underfloor and such that it's not a good idea.

My heat is mostly gas. It costs the same no matter what hour it's used at,
so reducing the temp for 8 hours at night when under blankets, can save a
bit. Not much (might have been 2-3%) and we don't do it now because of the
pets, but we used to when pet free.

"Stormin Mormon" wrote

Please forgive me while I troll for a moment.....

Hehe forgive while I feed the troll moment

Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when
leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch
up when I get home. I have a way of looking at the matter.
I'll explain my point of view after the argument is
underway.

Depends on how long you will be away and type of heating device used.
'Furnace' can be wood, coal, gas etc. I gather from the few with water
boiler systems underfloor and such that it's not a good idea.

My heat is mostly gas. It costs the same no matter what hour it's used at,
so reducing the temp for 8 hours at night when under blankets, can save a
bit. Not much (might have been 2-3%) and we don't do it now because of the
pets, but we used to when pet free.

The heat lost is the same as the heat you paid for. Lower
temp loses less heat (or loses more slowly). So turning down
reduces heat used, and fuel bill.

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..


"RickH" wrote in message
...

No, it takes too long to re-heat the boiler and all the
water in the
pipes, radiators, and floor tubing. It is always best to
set it once
and leave it there all winter. Too much energy is lost when
all that
water is asked to re-heat all the surfaces again. For
example when I
feel the return manifold from the coils under my concrete
slab after
the slab was allowed to cool, the return water is ice cold,
all that
energy to reheat the slab. No, bad asvice, best to keep it
warm and
leave it there, saves tons of energy.

The heat lost is the same as the heat you paid for. Lower
temp loses less heat (or loses more slowly). So turning down
reduces heat used, and fuel bill.

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..


"RickH" wrote in message
...

No, it takes too long to re-heat the boiler and all the
water in the
pipes, radiators, and floor tubing. It is always best to
set it once
and leave it there all winter. Too much energy is lost when
all that
water is asked to re-heat all the surfaces again. For
example when I
feel the return manifold from the coils under my concrete
slab after
the slab was allowed to cool, the return water is ice cold,
all that
energy to reheat the slab. No, bad asvice, best to keep it
warm and
leave it there, saves tons of energy.

I think the lower temp is a savings, however long.

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..


"hibb" wrote in message
...

I think it would depend on how long you are going to be out
of the
house. I wouldn't turn it down if I am only out for an hour
but if
your are going to be out for 8 hours it might be a good
idea.

David

I think the lower temp is a savings, however long.

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..


"hibb" wrote in message
...

I think it would depend on how long you are going to be out
of the
house. I wouldn't turn it down if I am only out for an hour
but if
your are going to be out for 8 hours it might be a good
idea.

David

Either one. My answer is the same. Lower temp means less
heat used.

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..


"RickH" wrote in message
news:2e779c01-e006-478d-8376-

Is this for forced air furnace or boiler?

Either one. My answer is the same. Lower temp means less
heat used.

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..


"RickH" wrote in message
news:2e779c01-e006-478d-8376-

Is this for forced air furnace or boiler?

Stormin Mormon wrote:
Please forgive me while I troll for a moment.....

Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when
leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch
up when I get home. I have a way of looking at the matter.
I'll explain my point of view after the argument is
underway.

In most applications it saves energy to turn it down. However if you
have a heat pump, and to get the house warmed up again it goes to
emergency heat, then it can cost more. If you can turn off the
emergency heat and wait a long time for the heat pump to catch up, then
you will save energy. The worst case is electric emergency heat, gas
emergency heat may or may not save money depending on the price and
efficiency of the furnace. Although it just occurred to me that you
asked about conserving *energy* and not *money* so that may mean that no
mater what your heating system is, turning it down then up again will
always save *energy*... I think?

Stormin Mormon wrote:
Please forgive me while I troll for a moment.....

Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when
leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch
up when I get home. I have a way of looking at the matter.
I'll explain my point of view after the argument is
underway.

In most applications it saves energy to turn it down. However if you
have a heat pump, and to get the house warmed up again it goes to
emergency heat, then it can cost more. If you can turn off the
emergency heat and wait a long time for the heat pump to catch up, then
you will save energy. The worst case is electric emergency heat, gas
emergency heat may or may not save money depending on the price and
efficiency of the furnace. Although it just occurred to me that you
asked about conserving *energy* and not *money* so that may mean that no
mater what your heating system is, turning it down then up again will
always save *energy*... I think?

RickH wrote:
On Oct 29, 11:20 am, IGot2P wrote:
RickH wrote:
On Oct 29, 7:29 am, Frank wrote:
On Oct 29, 8:22 am, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote:
Please forgive me while I troll for a moment.....
Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when
leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch
up when I get home. I have a way of looking at the matter.
I'll explain my point of view after the argument is
underway.
--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
Yes, you save energy turning it down. In balance less heat is lost.
No, it takes too long to re-heat the boiler and all the water in the
pipes, radiators, and floor tubing. It is always best to set it once
and leave it there all winter. Too much energy is lost when all that
water is asked to re-heat all the surfaces again. For example when I
feel the return manifold from the coils under my concrete slab after
the slab was allowed to cool, the return water is ice cold, all that
energy to reheat the slab. No, bad asvice, best to keep it warm and
leave it there, saves tons of energy.
I hope that you were just kidding because obviously you are wrong! Just
think for a minute.....if you were going to be gone for three months
don't you think you would save energy if you turned your thermostat
down? Well, the same would be true for a few hours, just not to the same
extent.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Yes, if I turned it down and left it there for a week or longer maybe.

But downturning for any period under a couple days and all the mass
you've spent heating once, now you have to re-heat over again. (my
system has several thousand feet of water tubing under both house
floor and garage slab zoned).

It might be different if you have forced air heat, but for water heat
(via radiators or radiant tube) every installer tells you "set it once
and forget it, the idea is to store heat".

I believe in your situation it will still save energy. The reason they
tell you to "set it and forget it" is for comfort. Due to the large
mass of your system it will have a much slower recovery time, but that
does not mean it will take more energy, it's just slower. Or you could
turn it down hours before leaving and have it turn on hours before
arriving home again. That should help with the comfort.

RickH wrote:
On Oct 29, 11:20 am, IGot2P wrote:
RickH wrote:
On Oct 29, 7:29 am, Frank wrote:
On Oct 29, 8:22 am, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote:
Please forgive me while I troll for a moment.....
Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when
leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch
up when I get home. I have a way of looking at the matter.
I'll explain my point of view after the argument is
underway.
--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
Yes, you save energy turning it down. In balance less heat is lost.
No, it takes too long to re-heat the boiler and all the water in the
pipes, radiators, and floor tubing. It is always best to set it once
and leave it there all winter. Too much energy is lost when all that
water is asked to re-heat all the surfaces again. For example when I
feel the return manifold from the coils under my concrete slab after
the slab was allowed to cool, the return water is ice cold, all that
energy to reheat the slab. No, bad asvice, best to keep it warm and
leave it there, saves tons of energy.
I hope that you were just kidding because obviously you are wrong! Just
think for a minute.....if you were going to be gone for three months
don't you think you would save energy if you turned your thermostat
down? Well, the same would be true for a few hours, just not to the same
extent.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Yes, if I turned it down and left it there for a week or longer maybe.

But downturning for any period under a couple days and all the mass
you've spent heating once, now you have to re-heat over again. (my
system has several thousand feet of water tubing under both house
floor and garage slab zoned).

It might be different if you have forced air heat, but for water heat
(via radiators or radiant tube) every installer tells you "set it once
and forget it, the idea is to store heat".

I believe in your situation it will still save energy. The reason they
tell you to "set it and forget it" is for comfort. Due to the large
mass of your system it will have a much slower recovery time, but that
does not mean it will take more energy, it's just slower. Or you could
turn it down hours before leaving and have it turn on hours before
arriving home again. That should help with the comfort.

No surveys or studies needed to address this question. The Second Law of
Thermodynamics decrees that the speed and extent of all heat transfers in
the universe depends solely on the temperature differential between two
objects. The moment you turn down the thermostat you start saving money. The
longer you keep it down, the more money you save.

For further musings: http://www.rationality.net/entropy.htm

--
Walter
www.rationality.net
-
"Frank" wrote in message
...
On Oct 29, 8:22 am, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote:
Please forgive me while I troll for a moment.....

Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when
leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch
up when I get home. I have a way of looking at the matter.
I'll explain my point of view after the argument is
underway.

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.

Yes, you save energy turning it down. In balance less heat is lost.

No surveys or studies needed to address this question. The Second Law of
Thermodynamics decrees that the speed and extent of all heat transfers in
the universe depends solely on the temperature differential between two
objects. The moment you turn down the thermostat you start saving money. The
longer you keep it down, the more money you save.

For further musings: http://www.rationality.net/entropy.htm

--
Walter
www.rationality.net
-
"Frank" wrote in message
...
On Oct 29, 8:22 am, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote:
Please forgive me while I troll for a moment.....

Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when
leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch
up when I get home. I have a way of looking at the matter.
I'll explain my point of view after the argument is
underway.

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.

Yes, you save energy turning it down. In balance less heat is lost.

On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 11:05:16 -0700 (PDT), RickH
wrote:

On Oct 29, 10:36*am, "SteveB" wrote:
No, it takes too long to re-heat the boiler and all the water in the
pipes, radiators, and floor tubing. *It is always best to set it once
and leave it there all winter. *Too much energy is lost when all that
water is asked to re-heat all the surfaces again. *For example when I
feel the return manifold from the coils under my concrete slab after
the slab was allowed to cool, the return water is ice cold, all that
energy to reheat the slab. *No, bad asvice, best to keep it warm and
leave it there, saves tons of energy.

We use warm water here to shower. *I'd say that a higher % of people use
heat pumps or gas to heat rather than water. *In your case, MAYBE it is
cheaper to leave it on, but I think you are only quoting yourself, and no
analytic studies by any testing agency. *Can you find any said studies? *I
don't doubt that you believe what you say is true, I just think that it is
not.

Steve

Boiler installers never put daily "set back" thermostats on boilers,
only forced air systems get those, and they tell you to set the
thermostat once and leave it there.

Why did you assume the Mormon had a boiler?

The rules are completely different for radiant heated buidings vs air
heated buildings.

In an air heated building you heat the air, in a radiant heated
building you heat the building materials and that in turn heats the
people. When you lose all that stored energy it costs a fortune to
recover it back in boiler usage.

It costs that same fortune and more to keep it hot without
interruption. Maybe it's also unpleasant becuase it takes hours to
heat up, but that's another story.

There is nothing quite like the
warmth of a radiant-heated house.

On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 11:05:16 -0700 (PDT), RickH
wrote:

On Oct 29, 10:36*am, "SteveB" wrote:
No, it takes too long to re-heat the boiler and all the water in the
pipes, radiators, and floor tubing. *It is always best to set it once
and leave it there all winter. *Too much energy is lost when all that
water is asked to re-heat all the surfaces again. *For example when I
feel the return manifold from the coils under my concrete slab after
the slab was allowed to cool, the return water is ice cold, all that
energy to reheat the slab. *No, bad asvice, best to keep it warm and
leave it there, saves tons of energy.

We use warm water here to shower. *I'd say that a higher % of people use
heat pumps or gas to heat rather than water. *In your case, MAYBE it is
cheaper to leave it on, but I think you are only quoting yourself, and no
analytic studies by any testing agency. *Can you find any said studies? *I
don't doubt that you believe what you say is true, I just think that it is
not.

Steve

Boiler installers never put daily "set back" thermostats on boilers,
only forced air systems get those, and they tell you to set the
thermostat once and leave it there.

Why did you assume the Mormon had a boiler?

The rules are completely different for radiant heated buidings vs air
heated buildings.

In an air heated building you heat the air, in a radiant heated
building you heat the building materials and that in turn heats the
people. When you lose all that stored energy it costs a fortune to
recover it back in boiler usage.

It costs that same fortune and more to keep it hot without
interruption. Maybe it's also unpleasant becuase it takes hours to
heat up, but that's another story.

There is nothing quite like the
warmth of a radiant-heated house.

On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 08:22:13 -0400, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote:

Please forgive me while I troll for a moment.....

Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when
leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch
up when I get home.

Yes, and you lose some of what you saved 9 hours earlier when it
started to cool off.

What you don't lose is the heat that wasn't radiated, conducted, or
convected from the house because the house spent most of those 9 hours
at a lower temperature.

If the house is 68 degrees, a certain amount of heat escapes. When
the house is 55 degrees, a lower amount escapes. If the temp outside
is 56, maybe no more heat escapes than enters. So you save the fuel
that would have been needed to make all that heat.

I have a way of looking at the matter.
I'll explain my point of view after the argument is
underway.

BTW, my mother always turned the heat down at night to save money.
There were no setback thermostats then, so she got up in the cold, put
on a flannel robe, and turned the thermostat up and tolerated it until
it got warm again, maybe 15? minutes with forced air heat. The only
reason not to is the period of discomfort, but with setback
thermostats, at least on days you don't get up or get home early, it
will turn on the heat in advance.

On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 08:22:13 -0400, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote:

Please forgive me while I troll for a moment.....

Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when
leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch
up when I get home.

Yes, and you lose some of what you saved 9 hours earlier when it
started to cool off.

What you don't lose is the heat that wasn't radiated, conducted, or
convected from the house because the house spent most of those 9 hours
at a lower temperature.

If the house is 68 degrees, a certain amount of heat escapes. When
the house is 55 degrees, a lower amount escapes. If the temp outside
is 56, maybe no more heat escapes than enters. So you save the fuel
that would have been needed to make all that heat.

I have a way of looking at the matter.
I'll explain my point of view after the argument is
underway.

BTW, my mother always turned the heat down at night to save money.
There were no setback thermostats then, so she got up in the cold, put
on a flannel robe, and turned the thermostat up and tolerated it until
it got warm again, maybe 15? minutes with forced air heat. The only
reason not to is the period of discomfort, but with setback
thermostats, at least on days you don't get up or get home early, it
will turn on the heat in advance.

Still, it's less energy used cause less energy is lost.

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..


"Van Chocstraw" wrote in
message
...

When you raise it you have to reheat
not only the heating system but the entire inside wall,
floor and
ceiling not to mention all the furniture and appliances.
When you lower
the thermostat, all those items lose all their heat again
the heat is
drawn out into the room and the room loses it through the
walls to the
outside. So....use your little noggin.

Still, it's less energy used cause less energy is lost.

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..


"Van Chocstraw" wrote in
message
...

When you raise it you have to reheat
not only the heating system but the entire inside wall,
floor and
ceiling not to mention all the furniture and appliances.
When you lower
the thermostat, all those items lose all their heat again
the heat is
drawn out into the room and the room loses it through the
walls to the
outside. So....use your little noggin.

On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 13:53:18 -0400, jeff_wisnia
wrote:


Poll question:

How many guys here have wives who mistakenly think that when warming up
a cooled down house the rate of temperature increase of a typical home
heating system will be faster if they shove the thermostat setting all
the way up to 90F than if they just move it to the appropriate setpoint.

No it won't, but what about when boiling water. Shouldn't the temp be
all the way up when one is in a hurry? Even though on my electric
stove with a medium sized pot of water, water will continue to boil
when the knob is at 6 out of 10.

Then of course they forget to reset it when the place reaches a
comfortable temperature and wait for the man of the house to snarl, "Why
the hell is it so damn hot in here?"

That would be bad. I have so much junk piled there, I can barely get
within 8 feet of my thermostat.

On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 13:53:18 -0400, jeff_wisnia
wrote:


Poll question:

How many guys here have wives who mistakenly think that when warming up
a cooled down house the rate of temperature increase of a typical home
heating system will be faster if they shove the thermostat setting all
the way up to 90F than if they just move it to the appropriate setpoint.

No it won't, but what about when boiling water. Shouldn't the temp be
all the way up when one is in a hurry? Even though on my electric
stove with a medium sized pot of water, water will continue to boil
when the knob is at 6 out of 10.

Then of course they forget to reset it when the place reaches a
comfortable temperature and wait for the man of the house to snarl, "Why
the hell is it so damn hot in here?"

That would be bad. I have so much junk piled there, I can barely get
within 8 feet of my thermostat.

On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 11:12:19 -0700 (PDT), N8N
wrote:


Heh.

Do you have any tips for properly instructing a user of a vehicle with
an automatic climate control system?

I drove my brother's car for two days last week and he has automatic
cc. It was 70 degrees out, and I opened the windows, but I still
wanted air from the blower vents. But afaik, I had no way to set the
air temp like I can do with my simple non-auto heater.

Is there a way to do that. He has a Lincoln.