Zypher repeats itself:

Humidifiers actually save fuel. The air temperature 'seems' warmer to
humans (creature comfort) if the humidity is high. Thus lower setting on
the thermostat.

Nonono. Repeating this won't make it so :-) Evaporating the water takes
far more energy than the lower thermostat setting saves.

The ASHRAE 55-2004 comfort standard says a 48x48x8' house with R20 walls
and ceiling would be equally comfy at 69.4 F and 20% RH or 68 F and 50% RH.
If it's very tight, with 0.5 air changes per hour, would humidification to
50% save energy?

G = 48'x48'/R20 + 48x4x8/R20 = 192 Btu/h-F, so dropping the room temp
from 69.4 to 68 F saves 1.4x192 = 269 Btu/h. At 69.4 F and 20% RH, Pd
= 0.2e^(17.863-9621/(460+69.4)) = 0.1466 "Hg, approximately, with wd
= 0.62198/(29.921/0.1466-1) = 0.003063. Air at 68 F and 50% RH has wh
= 0.007347. With 0.5x48x48x8/60 = 154 cfm of air leakage, humidifying
from wd to wh requires evaporating 154x60x0.075(wh-wd) = 2.96 pounds of
water per hour, which requires about 1000x2.96 = 2960 Btu/h of energy,
so the net "savings" is 2960-269 = -2691 Btu/h, or minus 64.6K Btu/day,
costing about $1/day more with oil heat or $2 per day with electric heat.

People tend to forget that evaporating water takes heat energy, even if
the "humidifier" uses little energy by itself, and that heat energy has
to come from somewhere. And we often get into discussions about health
and furniture, vs energy, and forget that caulking (vs humidification)
can raise the indoor RH while SAVING vs wasting more heating fuel.

Nick