On 01/04/2018 19:55, Andrew wrote:
On 01/04/2018 19:29, dennis@home wrote:
On 01/04/2018 12:55, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
Whilst our boiler has been inoperative, we have had to make do with
just the living room radiant gas fire. With door closed, it is more
than warm enough on 1/3 of its 3 bars lit, but the rest of the house
is cold. Aside from the heating, the gas boiler provided for all our
main hot water needs too, washing up, cleaning and baths. With an
electric shower. The gas heater has been lit roughly for the same
amount of time as the boiler would be providing heating in the place.

Cooking is via gas, so unaltered.

I log gas, electric and water consumption every week, on a Sunday.
The boiler failed mid- week, so this is the first full week with no
boiler. In the previous two full weeks with boiler in operation,
total gas consumption was £14 per week. In the this full week of no
boiler use consumption was £7 - so about half the cost if we put up
with one room heated, versus the whole house being comfortably warm.

If you have proper controls (eg zone valves and stats) then heating
the same space with the boiler will probably cost less than using the
fire.
Fires are only about 50% efficient while boilers are about 80%.


Old fashioned radiant fires, like the ones stuck on the front of
a Baxi Bermuda were far more efficient than 50%.

Many of the Gazco fires are in the 78 to 82% range.

It's the old cast-iron lumps with a non-fanned balanced flue
that are down to 50% or less.

Yes. The key is to have an outset, radiant fire. Or, to look at it
another way, to get as far away from an imitation coal fire as possible

--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid