On Oct 28, 11:54*am, harry wrote:
On Oct 28, 12:39*pm, "
wrote:
On Oct 28, 2:23*am, harry wrote:
On Oct 27, 7:01*pm, BobR wrote:
On Oct 27, 11:01*am, harry wrote:
On Oct 27, 4:38*pm, "
wrote:
On Thu, 27 Oct 2011 02:01:00 -0700 (PDT), harry wrote:
On Oct 26, 1:54*pm, "
wrote:
On Oct 25, 2:06*pm, BobR wrote:
On Oct 25, 12:26*pm, harry wrote:
On Oct 25, 1:48*pm, "
wrote:
On Oct 25, 2:02*am, harry wrote:
On Oct 24, 10:26*pm, RicodJour wrote:
On Oct 24, 11:16*am, harry wrote:
On Oct 24, 2:46*pm, RicodJour wrote:
On Oct 24, 1:26*am, "Robert Green" wrote:
We're in a nasty state with control shifting back and forth between
elections, Supreme Court decisions of 5-4 inviting future (and now it seems
inevitable) reversal. *We're acting like a poorly designed thermostat that
rapidly switches on and off when the set temperature is reached instead
The technical term is hysteresis.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hysteresis#Control_systems
A factor in all control systems. Mechanical, electrical, electronic
and even political. Though hysteria might be nearer themark for the
latter.
You should know, you being the resident expert on hysteria.
There is no single correct place for a thermostat in a domestic house.
No, but there are a whole bunch of wrong ones.
And therein is your major malfunction. *You're looking for perfect,
I'm looking for rational compromise and the least-bad solution.
Also, do try harder with your quoting. *You gave me an attribution,
cut everything I wrote, and yet still responded to it. *Such lax
habits are less than ideal.
R
My newsreader does a lot of cutting on it's own. (Google)
I mean that each room needs a thermostat to work properly. Even then
it needs to be carefully sited. *A single thermostat per house *will
never be much good.- Hide quoted text -
You know about as much about houses as you do politics
and economics. *I have lived in many houses where one thermostat
worked perfectly fine. *I'll bet lots of others here have had
similar experiences. *In fact, the standard here for the
majority of homes is one thermostat per heating SYSTEM..
That's what's done in most new construction as well.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
This because you are so primitive/backward in America. *Each heat
source in UK/Europe is individually thermostatically controlled. There
may be more than one heat source in each room. *It ii seasily possible
to knock 25% off the heating bill by doing this.
It has been so for about thirty years. *American heating systems are
fifty years behind European ones in terms of economy.
You have a lot of catching up to do.
Right, we are all looking forward to going back to having a window
unit in every room to cool and a heater in every room in the winter.
Example.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermos...radiator_valve
I have had a look round domestic house contsruction sites in America.
Absolutely appaliing standards. Primitive, poor workmanship, designed
by morons.
Most of the construction problems frequently brought up on this group
never exist in Europe. *I read them and marvel.-
Total BS!- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Gee, if everything is built so fine in Europe, why is it that
everytime
there is an earthquake in Greece, so many buildings just fall apart
killing tens of thousands of people?
As for one thermostat per room being essential, I've been to
Europe and can tell you that there is no noticeable positive
difference in comfort there vs the USA. *IF anything, it's
worse in Europe. *In Italy, for example, the AC sucks, hotels,
restaurants, etc tend to be hot and
you can't even get a cold beverage at a convenience store.
Harry talks about one thermostat per room as if that is
all that's needed. *When you have a residential AC
system, having a thermostat in each room would
require an automated damper system that would add
significantly to the cost, complexity and maintenance
of the system. *Would it be nice to have? *Sure.
Would most people here want it given what it adds
versus the cost? * I think not. *Nor do I think they would
want it or have it in the UK.
What you do have in Europe are more mini-splits.
Here in the USA we tend to avoid them because one
central unit is more cost effective and architecturally,
it's ugly having mini-splits hanging around everywhere.
And in most cases you can balance a central system close
enough that it's fine with one thermostat per system.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Everything sucks in Italy. *Haven'tyou seen the news?
s/Italy/Europe/- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Now you understand the reason why hot air systems will always be
inefficient. I haven't seen a domestic one in the UK for decades.
We only use wet systems.
Things are moving on again. The future appears to be ground source
heat pumps. *Our socialist gov will be subsidising their installation
soon.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_Heat_Incentive
So you will be left even further behind.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Heat pumps, including ground source heat pumps are already in use in
the states and have been for a number of years. *Guess it's hard for
you to know seeing as how you have your head in the sand.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
They have been here too. *The government is trying to get more of them
installed in domestic houses.
It's been usual only to install them where gas was not available but
electricity was. (Not that many over here and propane competes)
They are quite a bit more expensive than a gas heaating system over
here with all the digging/hole boring.
They are not supporting air source *or ground source that are
reversible.
So much for the claimed *technical advancements and smarts of
Britts. *According to the above, they are putting in heat pump systems
that only heat, not cool? *How dumb is that?
Gas was in the past very cheap, it came from off-shore wells but they
are nearly exhausted. Hence all the excitement.- Hide quoted text -
It is an energy saving thing, not technical. *They don't want people
running cooling here. It is unneccesary for 99.999% of the time.
The whole business is about reducing energy imports
99.999% of the time. Ah, I see - you reject my point that maintaining
an arbitrary heating number to a ridiculously narrow range, at one
point in every room, but believe that air conditioning is
'unnecessary'* in a country that has extremes of climate. Sure. Why
didn't you say so? Nothing could be more logical.
I live in NY - the place where a lot of British came to get away from
your ancestors, and in a typical year a temperature swing of -5F to
105F is not at all unusual. We're lucky here - other parts of the
country that have tough weather.
* Unnecessary...you drive a car, BarcaLounger Boy? Fly to exotic
lands to look at birds (yeah, that's _necessary_) so you can feel that
you understand the entire world from the comfort and vantage point of
your couple of weeks holiday?
R