On Aug 28, 2:56*pm, Andy Cap wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 06:09:18 -0700 (PDT), mike wrote:
From their website: The thermostat then stops demanding heat; but the
heat that is already in the system still has to work through. In
effect, because of this time-lag, the water or room is overheated.

Wouldn't the simple way to achieve the same result without spending
£150 on a gadget be to turn the heating down by a couple of degrees?

Surely, their assertion is, that you maintain the *same* temperature for less
energy input. *It sounds very much like getting something for nothing, but I
suspect it's more like nothing for £156 ! * *;-)


Well, maybe they're trying to say you maintain the same "target"
temperature, but in reality it would be a lower temperature for less
energy (which is a truism) because they've already described the
temperature without the gadget as "overheated" and the gadget
supposedly stops the overheating.

The Good Housekeeping tabloid journalism review is worth a read if you
want a laugh. They regurgitate the manufacturer's blurb and then
claim without any proof that it cuts a third off your gas bill.

You'd stand more chance of making a perpetual motion machine by
strapping buttered toast to your cat's back.