chris wallace wrote:

Peter Richardson wrote in message . ..

Electric is cheaper to install, thinner and no maintenance (no moving
parts)

Water is probably easier to control and therefore cheaper to run.

Depends how long you intend to stay, if you can justify the additional
expence of water system.

The decision is yours.


Thanks. I'm leaning towards electric. It seems that water would be
*much* harder to install. I already live here, so laying a screed
across the entire floor would require all my furniture (and me!) to be
moved out while it dries. It seems electric could be installed a room
at a time, which would be much easier in the short term. Is that
right?

Also, being thinner is an advantage for my flat.

How can I calculate the price differential between the two on running
costs? I'm not trying to add value to the flat, just make it warm!


About 3:1 at normal electricty rates - i,e. maybe 300 quid a year water,
£1000 a year electric.

Unless you only want to heat your floor at 3a.m. When economy 7 or
whatever allows you to pull electrons at similar rates.


Its teh same oil they burn in power stations, but they chuck out 30% of
the energy as waste heat, and it comes to you in a a huge capital
infrastructire of cables transformers and substations. All of which
nibbles a few percent off the efficiency every time it passes through them.

Electric heating is totally cost ineffective.

If you aren't going the how awter route, give up and put in rads.





Thanks for the help to both posters,

Chris.