Turn thermostat down or leave steady?
Please forgive me while I troll for a moment.....
Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch up when I get home. I have a way of looking at the matter. I'll explain my point of view after the argument is underway. -- Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus www.lds.org .. |
Turn thermostat down or leave steady?
On Oct 29, 8:22*am, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote: Please forgive me while I troll for a moment..... Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch up when I get home. I have a way of looking at the matter. I'll explain my point of view after the argument is underway. -- Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus *www.lds.org . Yes, you save energy turning it down. In balance less heat is lost. |
Turn thermostat down or leave steady?
On Oct 29, 8:29*am, Frank wrote:
On Oct 29, 8:22*am, "Stormin Mormon" wrote: Please forgive me while I troll for a moment..... Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch up when I get home. I have a way of looking at the matter. I'll explain my point of view after the argument is underway. -- Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus *www.lds.org . Yes, you save energy turning it down. *In balance less heat is lost. To elaborate, heat loss slows as the house cools (delta T is lower) so it takes less energy to maintain the house at a lower temperature and then heat it back up again. Especially so if the house is not well insulated. That said, I have not noticed any drop at all in my gas bills since installing a programmable thermostat :( nate |
Turn thermostat down or leave steady?
Stormin Mormon wrote:
Please forgive me while I troll for a moment..... Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch up when I get home. I have a way of looking at the matter. I'll explain my point of view after the argument is underway. Well, according to the message I have gotten several times from Oklahoma Natural Gas, turning down the thermostat 10 degrees for 8 hours per day will lower your bill by 10%. I'm not sure the bill itself will go down that much since part of the bill is a fixed rate operating cost, but the usage part should drop. And if you can't believe the gas company who can you believe. Bill |
Turn thermostat down or leave steady?
On Oct 29, 7:29*am, Frank wrote:
On Oct 29, 8:22*am, "Stormin Mormon" wrote: Please forgive me while I troll for a moment..... Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch up when I get home. I have a way of looking at the matter. I'll explain my point of view after the argument is underway. -- Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus *www.lds.org . Yes, you save energy turning it down. *In balance less heat is lost. No, it takes too long to re-heat the boiler and all the water in the pipes, radiators, and floor tubing. It is always best to set it once and leave it there all winter. Too much energy is lost when all that water is asked to re-heat all the surfaces again. For example when I feel the return manifold from the coils under my concrete slab after the slab was allowed to cool, the return water is ice cold, all that energy to reheat the slab. No, bad asvice, best to keep it warm and leave it there, saves tons of energy. |
Turn thermostat down or leave steady?
Stormin Mormon wrote:
Please forgive me while I troll for a moment..... Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch up when I get home. I have a way of looking at the matter. I'll explain my point of view after the argument is underway. Hi, Of course. You set it back for sure. |
Turn thermostat down or leave steady?
On Oct 29, 8:22*am, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote: Please forgive me while I troll for a moment..... Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch up when I get home. I have a way of looking at the matter. I'll explain my point of view after the argument is underway. -- Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus *www.lds.org . I think it would depend on how long you are going to be out of the house. I wouldn't turn it down if I am only out for an hour but if your are going to be out for 8 hours it might be a good idea. David |
Turn thermostat down or leave steady?
On Oct 29, 11:13*am, hibb wrote:
On Oct 29, 8:22*am, "Stormin Mormon" wrote: Please forgive me while I troll for a moment..... Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch up when I get home. I have a way of looking at the matter. I'll explain my point of view after the argument is underway. -- Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus *www.lds.org . I think it would depend on how long you are going to be out of the house. I wouldn't turn it down if I am only out for an hour but if your are going to be out for 8 hours it might be a good idea. David In terms of saving energy, the energy savings start as soon as the house cools to the point that the heat would have come on had it not been turned down. From that point on, you are saving energy. Whether it makes enough difference to make it worthwhile depends on how long it's turned down for. If you turn it down to 62 overnight instead of 72 and it's 25 outside, no question you are saving energy and that gas company estimate of about 10% sounds in the ball park. As someone already pointed out, the governing factor here is that the rate of heat loss is directly proportional to the temp difference between inside and out, at least excluding the heat loss due to actual air leakage. The only other issue that comes into play would be if there are differing energy costs or different fuels involved. For example, if you had a heat pump and electricity costs less at night than in the morning, then that could easily negate the effect. Or if when you set it back, in the morning a different fuel source kicks in during recovery, etc. |
Turn thermostat down or leave steady?
No, it takes too long to re-heat the boiler and all the water in the pipes, radiators, and floor tubing. It is always best to set it once and leave it there all winter. Too much energy is lost when all that water is asked to re-heat all the surfaces again. For example when I feel the return manifold from the coils under my concrete slab after the slab was allowed to cool, the return water is ice cold, all that energy to reheat the slab. No, bad asvice, best to keep it warm and leave it there, saves tons of energy. We use warm water here to shower. I'd say that a higher % of people use heat pumps or gas to heat rather than water. In your case, MAYBE it is cheaper to leave it on, but I think you are only quoting yourself, and no analytic studies by any testing agency. Can you find any said studies? I don't doubt that you believe what you say is true, I just think that it is not. Steve |
Turn thermostat down or leave steady?
On Oct 29, 7:22*am, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote: Please forgive me while I troll for a moment..... Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch up when I get home. I have a way of looking at the matter. I'll explain my point of view after the argument is underway. -- Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus *www.lds.org . My experiments say yes. We have 3 zones, and 2 are on setback thermostats, these 2 parts of the house are the least used, so I use extreme setback down to 50 on heat and up to 90 on AC. Still when we use them the unit has kicked on so no inconvenience except on the occasional trip through during the setback. My savings are well over the 10% mentioned, and my propane man is getting upset, hardly worth the stop anymore. (125 gal Feb thru October, mostly used to cook, heat water, dry clothes. My electric bill is also down over 1/3. I started this when energy prices spiked last year, and it has worked so well I will continue. It takes a lot of BTUs to get a room to room temperature after an extreme setback, but apparently not as many as keeping it there. |
Turn thermostat down or leave steady?
RickH wrote:
On Oct 29, 7:29 am, Frank wrote: On Oct 29, 8:22 am, "Stormin Mormon" wrote: Please forgive me while I troll for a moment..... Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch up when I get home. I have a way of looking at the matter. I'll explain my point of view after the argument is underway. -- Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus www.lds.org . Yes, you save energy turning it down. In balance less heat is lost. No, it takes too long to re-heat the boiler and all the water in the pipes, radiators, and floor tubing. It is always best to set it once and leave it there all winter. Too much energy is lost when all that water is asked to re-heat all the surfaces again. For example when I feel the return manifold from the coils under my concrete slab after the slab was allowed to cool, the return water is ice cold, all that energy to reheat the slab. No, bad asvice, best to keep it warm and leave it there, saves tons of energy. I hope that you were just kidding because obviously you are wrong! Just think for a minute.....if you were going to be gone for three months don't you think you would save energy if you turned your thermostat down? Well, the same would be true for a few hours, just not to the same extent. |
Turn thermostat down or leave steady?
Stormin Mormon wrote:
Please forgive me while I troll for a moment..... Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch up when I get home. I have a way of looking at the matter. I'll explain my point of view after the argument is underway. OK, let's have that point of view now. Poll question: How many guys here have wives who mistakenly think that when warming up a cooled down house the rate of temperature increase of a typical home heating system will be faster if they shove the thermostat setting all the way up to 90F than if they just move it to the appropriate setpoint. Then of course they forget to reset it when the place reaches a comfortable temperature and wait for the man of the house to snarl, "Why the hell is it so damn hot in here?" And visa versa for A/C of course. It can't just only happen to me. G Jeff PS, I realize there may be some HVAC systems which don't conform to the above scenario, but they sure aren't in the majority around here. -- Jeffry Wisnia (W1BSV + Brass Rat '57 EE) The speed of light is 1.8*10e12 furlongs per fortnight. |
Turn thermostat down or leave steady?
On Oct 29, 11:20*am, IGot2P wrote:
RickH wrote: On Oct 29, 7:29 am, Frank wrote: On Oct 29, 8:22 am, "Stormin Mormon" wrote: Please forgive me while I troll for a moment..... Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch up when I get home. I have a way of looking at the matter. I'll explain my point of view after the argument is underway. -- Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus *www.lds.org . Yes, you save energy turning it down. *In balance less heat is lost. No, it takes too long to re-heat the boiler and all the water in the pipes, radiators, and floor tubing. *It is always best to set it once and leave it there all winter. *Too much energy is lost when all that water is asked to re-heat all the surfaces again. *For example when I feel the return manifold from the coils under my concrete slab after the slab was allowed to cool, the return water is ice cold, all that energy to reheat the slab. *No, bad asvice, best to keep it warm and leave it there, saves tons of energy. I hope that you were just kidding because obviously you are wrong! Just think for a minute.....if you were going to be gone for three months don't you think you would save energy if you turned your thermostat down? Well, the same would be true for a few hours, just not to the same extent.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Yes, if I turned it down and left it there for a week or longer maybe. But downturning for any period under a couple days and all the mass you've spent heating once, now you have to re-heat over again. (my system has several thousand feet of water tubing under both house floor and garage slab zoned). It might be different if you have forced air heat, but for water heat (via radiators or radiant tube) every installer tells you "set it once and forget it, the idea is to store heat". |
Turn thermostat down or leave steady?
On Oct 29, 10:36*am, "SteveB" wrote:
No, it takes too long to re-heat the boiler and all the water in the pipes, radiators, and floor tubing. *It is always best to set it once and leave it there all winter. *Too much energy is lost when all that water is asked to re-heat all the surfaces again. *For example when I feel the return manifold from the coils under my concrete slab after the slab was allowed to cool, the return water is ice cold, all that energy to reheat the slab. *No, bad asvice, best to keep it warm and leave it there, saves tons of energy. We use warm water here to shower. *I'd say that a higher % of people use heat pumps or gas to heat rather than water. *In your case, MAYBE it is cheaper to leave it on, but I think you are only quoting yourself, and no analytic studies by any testing agency. *Can you find any said studies? *I don't doubt that you believe what you say is true, I just think that it is not. Steve Boiler installers never put daily "set back" thermostats on boilers, only forced air systems get those, and they tell you to set the thermostat once and leave it there. The rules are completely different for radiant heated buidings vs air heated buildings. In an air heated building you heat the air, in a radiant heated building you heat the building materials and that in turn heats the people. When you lose all that stored energy it costs a fortune to recover it back in boiler usage. There is nothing quite like the warmth of a radiant-heated house. |
Turn thermostat down or leave steady?
On Oct 29, 7:22*am, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote: Please forgive me while I troll for a moment..... Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch up when I get home. I have a way of looking at the matter. I'll explain my point of view after the argument is underway. -- Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus *www.lds.org . Is this for forced air furnace or boiler? |
Turn thermostat down or leave steady?
On Oct 29, 1:53*pm, jeff_wisnia
wrote: Stormin Mormon wrote: Please forgive me while I troll for a moment..... Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch up when I get home. I have a way of looking at the matter. I'll explain my point of view after the argument is underway. OK, let's have that point of view now. Poll question: How many guys here have wives who mistakenly think that when warming up a cooled down house the rate of temperature increase of a typical home heating system will be faster if they shove the thermostat setting all the way up to 90F than if they just move it to the appropriate setpoint. Then of course they forget to reset it when the place reaches a comfortable temperature and wait for the man of the house to snarl, "Why the hell is it so damn hot in here?" And visa versa for A/C of course. It can't just only happen to me. G Jeff PS, I realize there may be some HVAC systems which don't conform to the above scenario, but they sure aren't in the majority around here. Heh. Do you have any tips for properly instructing a user of a vehicle with an automatic climate control system? I *hate* getting in my old Porsche and driving along merrily and then suddenly realizing that I'm sweating my cojones off. Takes me a while to realize that the "thermostat" has been cranked up to some ungodly temp. because when I was driving the car daily I think I maybe touched the control twice a year... nate |
Turn thermostat down or leave steady?
On Oct 29, 2:53*pm, jeff_wisnia
wrote: Stormin Mormon wrote: Please forgive me while I troll for a moment..... Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch up when I get home. I have a way of looking at the matter. I'll explain my point of view after the argument is underway. OK, let's have that point of view now. Poll question: How many guys here have wives who mistakenly think that when warming up a cooled down house the rate of temperature increase of a typical home heating system will be faster if they shove the thermostat setting all the way up to 90F than if they just move it to the appropriate setpoint. Then of course they forget to reset it when the place reaches a comfortable temperature and wait for the man of the house to snarl, "Why the hell is it so damn hot in here?" And visa versa for A/C of course. It can't just only happen to me. G Jeff PS, I realize there may be some HVAC systems which don't conform to the above scenario, but they sure aren't in the majority around here. -- Jeffry Wisnia (W1BSV + Brass Rat '57 EE) The speed of light is 1.8*10e12 furlongs per fortnight. The whole question and some of the answers, demonstrates the generally poor knowledge of basic physics. Maybe that's our education system? No wonder the Russians got a satellite into space first? .. Obviuosly if the temperature of the inside of a house is lower there will be less heat lost to outside. Because that's where it goes folks! From inside the house to outside. Higher winds also help to conduct it away. If one left the house for a solid month with the heat turned to minimum (or off, provided nothing froze up!) less heat would be used. Whereas if the house is fully occupied heat turned to normal and with doors opening and closing more heat will be lost to outside; all a function of the temperature difference between outside and inside, depending on your insulation and air exchanger, vents etc. Where it gets confusing for some is that with the thermostat set lower the whole interior of the house, walls, flooring, furniture, appliances, books etc. etc. cool down to that lower interior house temperature and it takes time and extra heat to bring them back up whatever the occupants wants, after they get home. But the' extra' heat is required only for so long as it takes for the house temperature to 'catch up'. It depends on the thermal mass of the house interior and it's contents. If one has a house constructed of masonry or brick and/or with concrete floors/slab it will take longer to bring temperature back up. A well insulated wood frame maybe less? Conversely the next time the occupant leaves and turns the temperature down less (or no) heating will be required as the house structure/ contents cool down. It will be nice and comfortable; with 'no one' there, for quite a while. Later the occupants return and will find the house chilly and that it will take several hours for the house and it contents to warm up again! By the way. Lot of people confuse 'heat' (or absence of heat) with 'temperature', right? Trying to explain to my neighbour that if we had three identical blocks of material outside in the cold, (or even on a regular cool day) one of concrete, one of metal and one of wood. They would all be at the same temperature. But if/when he picked them up the metal would 'feel' colder than the wood. BECAUSE it would conduct HEAT away from his hand more quickly than the others. Even though all are at the same TEMPERATURE. Have fun. |
Turn thermostat down or leave steady?
"Stormin Mormon" wrote
Please forgive me while I troll for a moment..... Hehe forgive while I feed the troll moment Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch up when I get home. I have a way of looking at the matter. I'll explain my point of view after the argument is underway. Depends on how long you will be away and type of heating device used. 'Furnace' can be wood, coal, gas etc. I gather from the few with water boiler systems underfloor and such that it's not a good idea. My heat is mostly gas. It costs the same no matter what hour it's used at, so reducing the temp for 8 hours at night when under blankets, can save a bit. Not much (might have been 2-3%) and we don't do it now because of the pets, but we used to when pet free. |
Turn thermostat down or leave steady?
"Stormin Mormon" wrote
Please forgive me while I troll for a moment..... Hehe forgive while I feed the troll moment Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch up when I get home. I have a way of looking at the matter. I'll explain my point of view after the argument is underway. Depends on how long you will be away and type of heating device used. 'Furnace' can be wood, coal, gas etc. I gather from the few with water boiler systems underfloor and such that it's not a good idea. My heat is mostly gas. It costs the same no matter what hour it's used at, so reducing the temp for 8 hours at night when under blankets, can save a bit. Not much (might have been 2-3%) and we don't do it now because of the pets, but we used to when pet free. |
Turn thermostat down or leave steady?
The heat lost is the same as the heat you paid for. Lower
temp loses less heat (or loses more slowly). So turning down reduces heat used, and fuel bill. -- Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus www.lds.org .. "RickH" wrote in message ... No, it takes too long to re-heat the boiler and all the water in the pipes, radiators, and floor tubing. It is always best to set it once and leave it there all winter. Too much energy is lost when all that water is asked to re-heat all the surfaces again. For example when I feel the return manifold from the coils under my concrete slab after the slab was allowed to cool, the return water is ice cold, all that energy to reheat the slab. No, bad asvice, best to keep it warm and leave it there, saves tons of energy. |
Turn thermostat down or leave steady?
The heat lost is the same as the heat you paid for. Lower
temp loses less heat (or loses more slowly). So turning down reduces heat used, and fuel bill. -- Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus www.lds.org .. "RickH" wrote in message ... No, it takes too long to re-heat the boiler and all the water in the pipes, radiators, and floor tubing. It is always best to set it once and leave it there all winter. Too much energy is lost when all that water is asked to re-heat all the surfaces again. For example when I feel the return manifold from the coils under my concrete slab after the slab was allowed to cool, the return water is ice cold, all that energy to reheat the slab. No, bad asvice, best to keep it warm and leave it there, saves tons of energy. |
Turn thermostat down or leave steady?
I think the lower temp is a savings, however long.
-- Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus www.lds.org .. "hibb" wrote in message ... I think it would depend on how long you are going to be out of the house. I wouldn't turn it down if I am only out for an hour but if your are going to be out for 8 hours it might be a good idea. David |
Turn thermostat down or leave steady?
I think the lower temp is a savings, however long.
-- Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus www.lds.org .. "hibb" wrote in message ... I think it would depend on how long you are going to be out of the house. I wouldn't turn it down if I am only out for an hour but if your are going to be out for 8 hours it might be a good idea. David |
Turn thermostat down or leave steady?
Either one. My answer is the same. Lower temp means less
heat used. -- Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus www.lds.org .. "RickH" wrote in message news:2e779c01-e006-478d-8376- Is this for forced air furnace or boiler? |
Turn thermostat down or leave steady?
Either one. My answer is the same. Lower temp means less
heat used. -- Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus www.lds.org .. "RickH" wrote in message news:2e779c01-e006-478d-8376- Is this for forced air furnace or boiler? |
Turn thermostat down or leave steady?
Stormin Mormon wrote:
Please forgive me while I troll for a moment..... Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch up when I get home. I have a way of looking at the matter. I'll explain my point of view after the argument is underway. In most applications it saves energy to turn it down. However if you have a heat pump, and to get the house warmed up again it goes to emergency heat, then it can cost more. If you can turn off the emergency heat and wait a long time for the heat pump to catch up, then you will save energy. The worst case is electric emergency heat, gas emergency heat may or may not save money depending on the price and efficiency of the furnace. Although it just occurred to me that you asked about conserving *energy* and not *money* so that may mean that no mater what your heating system is, turning it down then up again will always save *energy*... I think? |
Turn thermostat down or leave steady?
Stormin Mormon wrote:
Please forgive me while I troll for a moment..... Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch up when I get home. I have a way of looking at the matter. I'll explain my point of view after the argument is underway. In most applications it saves energy to turn it down. However if you have a heat pump, and to get the house warmed up again it goes to emergency heat, then it can cost more. If you can turn off the emergency heat and wait a long time for the heat pump to catch up, then you will save energy. The worst case is electric emergency heat, gas emergency heat may or may not save money depending on the price and efficiency of the furnace. Although it just occurred to me that you asked about conserving *energy* and not *money* so that may mean that no mater what your heating system is, turning it down then up again will always save *energy*... I think? |
Turn thermostat down or leave steady?
RickH wrote:
On Oct 29, 11:20 am, IGot2P wrote: RickH wrote: On Oct 29, 7:29 am, Frank wrote: On Oct 29, 8:22 am, "Stormin Mormon" wrote: Please forgive me while I troll for a moment..... Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch up when I get home. I have a way of looking at the matter. I'll explain my point of view after the argument is underway. -- Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus www.lds.org . Yes, you save energy turning it down. In balance less heat is lost. No, it takes too long to re-heat the boiler and all the water in the pipes, radiators, and floor tubing. It is always best to set it once and leave it there all winter. Too much energy is lost when all that water is asked to re-heat all the surfaces again. For example when I feel the return manifold from the coils under my concrete slab after the slab was allowed to cool, the return water is ice cold, all that energy to reheat the slab. No, bad asvice, best to keep it warm and leave it there, saves tons of energy. I hope that you were just kidding because obviously you are wrong! Just think for a minute.....if you were going to be gone for three months don't you think you would save energy if you turned your thermostat down? Well, the same would be true for a few hours, just not to the same extent.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Yes, if I turned it down and left it there for a week or longer maybe. But downturning for any period under a couple days and all the mass you've spent heating once, now you have to re-heat over again. (my system has several thousand feet of water tubing under both house floor and garage slab zoned). It might be different if you have forced air heat, but for water heat (via radiators or radiant tube) every installer tells you "set it once and forget it, the idea is to store heat". I believe in your situation it will still save energy. The reason they tell you to "set it and forget it" is for comfort. Due to the large mass of your system it will have a much slower recovery time, but that does not mean it will take more energy, it's just slower. Or you could turn it down hours before leaving and have it turn on hours before arriving home again. That should help with the comfort. |
Turn thermostat down or leave steady?
RickH wrote:
On Oct 29, 11:20 am, IGot2P wrote: RickH wrote: On Oct 29, 7:29 am, Frank wrote: On Oct 29, 8:22 am, "Stormin Mormon" wrote: Please forgive me while I troll for a moment..... Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch up when I get home. I have a way of looking at the matter. I'll explain my point of view after the argument is underway. -- Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus www.lds.org . Yes, you save energy turning it down. In balance less heat is lost. No, it takes too long to re-heat the boiler and all the water in the pipes, radiators, and floor tubing. It is always best to set it once and leave it there all winter. Too much energy is lost when all that water is asked to re-heat all the surfaces again. For example when I feel the return manifold from the coils under my concrete slab after the slab was allowed to cool, the return water is ice cold, all that energy to reheat the slab. No, bad asvice, best to keep it warm and leave it there, saves tons of energy. I hope that you were just kidding because obviously you are wrong! Just think for a minute.....if you were going to be gone for three months don't you think you would save energy if you turned your thermostat down? Well, the same would be true for a few hours, just not to the same extent.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Yes, if I turned it down and left it there for a week or longer maybe. But downturning for any period under a couple days and all the mass you've spent heating once, now you have to re-heat over again. (my system has several thousand feet of water tubing under both house floor and garage slab zoned). It might be different if you have forced air heat, but for water heat (via radiators or radiant tube) every installer tells you "set it once and forget it, the idea is to store heat". I believe in your situation it will still save energy. The reason they tell you to "set it and forget it" is for comfort. Due to the large mass of your system it will have a much slower recovery time, but that does not mean it will take more energy, it's just slower. Or you could turn it down hours before leaving and have it turn on hours before arriving home again. That should help with the comfort. |
Turn thermostat down or leave steady?
No surveys or studies needed to address this question. The Second Law of
Thermodynamics decrees that the speed and extent of all heat transfers in the universe depends solely on the temperature differential between two objects. The moment you turn down the thermostat you start saving money. The longer you keep it down, the more money you save. For further musings: http://www.rationality.net/entropy.htm -- Walter www.rationality.net - "Frank" wrote in message ... On Oct 29, 8:22 am, "Stormin Mormon" wrote: Please forgive me while I troll for a moment..... Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch up when I get home. I have a way of looking at the matter. I'll explain my point of view after the argument is underway. -- Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus www.lds.org . Yes, you save energy turning it down. In balance less heat is lost. |
Turn thermostat down or leave steady?
No surveys or studies needed to address this question. The Second Law of
Thermodynamics decrees that the speed and extent of all heat transfers in the universe depends solely on the temperature differential between two objects. The moment you turn down the thermostat you start saving money. The longer you keep it down, the more money you save. For further musings: http://www.rationality.net/entropy.htm -- Walter www.rationality.net - "Frank" wrote in message ... On Oct 29, 8:22 am, "Stormin Mormon" wrote: Please forgive me while I troll for a moment..... Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch up when I get home. I have a way of looking at the matter. I'll explain my point of view after the argument is underway. -- Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus www.lds.org . Yes, you save energy turning it down. In balance less heat is lost. |
Turn thermostat down or leave steady?
On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 11:05:16 -0700 (PDT), RickH
wrote: On Oct 29, 10:36*am, "SteveB" wrote: No, it takes too long to re-heat the boiler and all the water in the pipes, radiators, and floor tubing. *It is always best to set it once and leave it there all winter. *Too much energy is lost when all that water is asked to re-heat all the surfaces again. *For example when I feel the return manifold from the coils under my concrete slab after the slab was allowed to cool, the return water is ice cold, all that energy to reheat the slab. *No, bad asvice, best to keep it warm and leave it there, saves tons of energy. We use warm water here to shower. *I'd say that a higher % of people use heat pumps or gas to heat rather than water. *In your case, MAYBE it is cheaper to leave it on, but I think you are only quoting yourself, and no analytic studies by any testing agency. *Can you find any said studies? *I don't doubt that you believe what you say is true, I just think that it is not. Steve Boiler installers never put daily "set back" thermostats on boilers, only forced air systems get those, and they tell you to set the thermostat once and leave it there. Why did you assume the Mormon had a boiler? The rules are completely different for radiant heated buidings vs air heated buildings. In an air heated building you heat the air, in a radiant heated building you heat the building materials and that in turn heats the people. When you lose all that stored energy it costs a fortune to recover it back in boiler usage. It costs that same fortune and more to keep it hot without interruption. Maybe it's also unpleasant becuase it takes hours to heat up, but that's another story. There is nothing quite like the warmth of a radiant-heated house. |
Turn thermostat down or leave steady?
On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 11:05:16 -0700 (PDT), RickH
wrote: On Oct 29, 10:36*am, "SteveB" wrote: No, it takes too long to re-heat the boiler and all the water in the pipes, radiators, and floor tubing. *It is always best to set it once and leave it there all winter. *Too much energy is lost when all that water is asked to re-heat all the surfaces again. *For example when I feel the return manifold from the coils under my concrete slab after the slab was allowed to cool, the return water is ice cold, all that energy to reheat the slab. *No, bad asvice, best to keep it warm and leave it there, saves tons of energy. We use warm water here to shower. *I'd say that a higher % of people use heat pumps or gas to heat rather than water. *In your case, MAYBE it is cheaper to leave it on, but I think you are only quoting yourself, and no analytic studies by any testing agency. *Can you find any said studies? *I don't doubt that you believe what you say is true, I just think that it is not. Steve Boiler installers never put daily "set back" thermostats on boilers, only forced air systems get those, and they tell you to set the thermostat once and leave it there. Why did you assume the Mormon had a boiler? The rules are completely different for radiant heated buidings vs air heated buildings. In an air heated building you heat the air, in a radiant heated building you heat the building materials and that in turn heats the people. When you lose all that stored energy it costs a fortune to recover it back in boiler usage. It costs that same fortune and more to keep it hot without interruption. Maybe it's also unpleasant becuase it takes hours to heat up, but that's another story. There is nothing quite like the warmth of a radiant-heated house. |
Turn thermostat down or leave steady?
On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 08:22:13 -0400, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote: Please forgive me while I troll for a moment..... Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch up when I get home. Yes, and you lose some of what you saved 9 hours earlier when it started to cool off. What you don't lose is the heat that wasn't radiated, conducted, or convected from the house because the house spent most of those 9 hours at a lower temperature. If the house is 68 degrees, a certain amount of heat escapes. When the house is 55 degrees, a lower amount escapes. If the temp outside is 56, maybe no more heat escapes than enters. So you save the fuel that would have been needed to make all that heat. I have a way of looking at the matter. I'll explain my point of view after the argument is underway. BTW, my mother always turned the heat down at night to save money. There were no setback thermostats then, so she got up in the cold, put on a flannel robe, and turned the thermostat up and tolerated it until it got warm again, maybe 15? minutes with forced air heat. The only reason not to is the period of discomfort, but with setback thermostats, at least on days you don't get up or get home early, it will turn on the heat in advance. |
Turn thermostat down or leave steady?
On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 08:22:13 -0400, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote: Please forgive me while I troll for a moment..... Is it energy saving to turn the thermostat down, when leaving the house? I mean, the furnace has to run to catch up when I get home. Yes, and you lose some of what you saved 9 hours earlier when it started to cool off. What you don't lose is the heat that wasn't radiated, conducted, or convected from the house because the house spent most of those 9 hours at a lower temperature. If the house is 68 degrees, a certain amount of heat escapes. When the house is 55 degrees, a lower amount escapes. If the temp outside is 56, maybe no more heat escapes than enters. So you save the fuel that would have been needed to make all that heat. I have a way of looking at the matter. I'll explain my point of view after the argument is underway. BTW, my mother always turned the heat down at night to save money. There were no setback thermostats then, so she got up in the cold, put on a flannel robe, and turned the thermostat up and tolerated it until it got warm again, maybe 15? minutes with forced air heat. The only reason not to is the period of discomfort, but with setback thermostats, at least on days you don't get up or get home early, it will turn on the heat in advance. |
Turn thermostat down or leave steady?
Still, it's less energy used cause less energy is lost.
-- Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus www.lds.org .. "Van Chocstraw" wrote in message ... When you raise it you have to reheat not only the heating system but the entire inside wall, floor and ceiling not to mention all the furniture and appliances. When you lower the thermostat, all those items lose all their heat again the heat is drawn out into the room and the room loses it through the walls to the outside. So....use your little noggin. |
Turn thermostat down or leave steady?
Still, it's less energy used cause less energy is lost.
-- Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus www.lds.org .. "Van Chocstraw" wrote in message ... When you raise it you have to reheat not only the heating system but the entire inside wall, floor and ceiling not to mention all the furniture and appliances. When you lower the thermostat, all those items lose all their heat again the heat is drawn out into the room and the room loses it through the walls to the outside. So....use your little noggin. |
Turn thermostat down or leave steady?
On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 13:53:18 -0400, jeff_wisnia
wrote: Poll question: How many guys here have wives who mistakenly think that when warming up a cooled down house the rate of temperature increase of a typical home heating system will be faster if they shove the thermostat setting all the way up to 90F than if they just move it to the appropriate setpoint. No it won't, but what about when boiling water. Shouldn't the temp be all the way up when one is in a hurry? Even though on my electric stove with a medium sized pot of water, water will continue to boil when the knob is at 6 out of 10. Then of course they forget to reset it when the place reaches a comfortable temperature and wait for the man of the house to snarl, "Why the hell is it so damn hot in here?" That would be bad. I have so much junk piled there, I can barely get within 8 feet of my thermostat. |
Turn thermostat down or leave steady?
On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 13:53:18 -0400, jeff_wisnia
wrote: Poll question: How many guys here have wives who mistakenly think that when warming up a cooled down house the rate of temperature increase of a typical home heating system will be faster if they shove the thermostat setting all the way up to 90F than if they just move it to the appropriate setpoint. No it won't, but what about when boiling water. Shouldn't the temp be all the way up when one is in a hurry? Even though on my electric stove with a medium sized pot of water, water will continue to boil when the knob is at 6 out of 10. Then of course they forget to reset it when the place reaches a comfortable temperature and wait for the man of the house to snarl, "Why the hell is it so damn hot in here?" That would be bad. I have so much junk piled there, I can barely get within 8 feet of my thermostat. |
Turn thermostat down or leave steady?
On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 11:12:19 -0700 (PDT), N8N
wrote: Heh. Do you have any tips for properly instructing a user of a vehicle with an automatic climate control system? I drove my brother's car for two days last week and he has automatic cc. It was 70 degrees out, and I opened the windows, but I still wanted air from the blower vents. But afaik, I had no way to set the air temp like I can do with my simple non-auto heater. Is there a way to do that. He has a Lincoln. |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:37 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 DIYbanter