Let's say I stay upstairs alone in a 2600 sq ft 2-story house. I can
turn on the gas heater of the house for upstairs only, set the
thermostat to (say) 70 F. Or I can use a personal haolgen far-infrared
heater aiming at me a few feet away, set at the lowest level using 350
watts. Which costs less? You would think the latter is cheaper because
the heat is localized. But it's continuous as opposed to the house
heater coming on and off. And also the house heater uses gas, which
costs less than electricity. If I didn't make myself clear, let me
know. Thanks.

?
"Yong Huang" wrote in message
...
Let's say I stay upstairs alone in a 2600 sq ft 2-story house. I can
turn on the gas heater of the house for upstairs only, set the
thermostat to (say) 70 F. Or I can use a personal haolgen far-infrared
heater aiming at me a few feet away, set at the lowest level using 350
watts. Which costs less? You would think the latter is cheaper because
the heat is localized. But it's continuous as opposed to the house
heater coming on and off. And also the house heater uses gas, which
costs less than electricity. If I didn't make myself clear, let me
know. Thanks.

In my town, that halogen heater would be about 6¢ an hour to operate. At
24 hours a day, or $1.44 a day or $44 a month. You can't heat a house that
size for $44 a month.

You still want the house to be about 45 to 50 degrees to prevent freezing so
you won't get away free on the gas, but you could save. The down side is,
you will freeze your butt when you sit on the toilet in a cold bathroom.

You will be frozen on one side and baked on the other and be sick a lot,
usually pnuemonia.

I lowered my home to 55F when it was vacant and raised it to 72 on weekends
for about a year. A 15 year old house it wrecked the floors, door frames and
many other items due to drying them out. One door frame twisted so bad it
ripped up the vinyl flooring as it moved away from the frame. When I
fastened it again it broke the door frame and I had to repair it. The floors
began to squeek and snap and pop and they were all screwed down and never
did that before.

Turn the genral house down some...say 65F and get some small electrical
heaters to warm the areas you sit in. Be careful of those ceramic puck
heaters. I have seen them burn out and shoot flames out of them as the
element burns out.

Costs all depend on fuels and rates in your area. With other rooms cooler
you will always have draughts as the rooms try to equalize.



"Yong Huang" wrote in message
...
Let's say I stay upstairs alone in a 2600 sq ft 2-story house. I can
turn on the gas heater of the house for upstairs only, set the
thermostat to (say) 70 F. Or I can use a personal haolgen far-infrared
heater aiming at me a few feet away, set at the lowest level using 350
watts. Which costs less? You would think the latter is cheaper because
the heat is localized. But it's continuous as opposed to the house
heater coming on and off. And also the house heater uses gas, which
costs less than electricity. If I didn't make myself clear, let me
know. Thanks.

Thanks, Ed and Josepi. Your messages answered my question. I forgot to
mention I'm in south Texas. The coldest here is still above 55
indoors. But it may be a good idea to raise the thermostat a little to
better protect the wood structure. The halogen heater heating one side
of the body is not a big problem for me. I place it kind of in front
of me.

"Yong Huang" wrote in message
...
Let's say I stay upstairs alone in a 2600 sq ft 2-story house. I can
turn on the gas heater of the house for upstairs only, set the
thermostat to (say) 70 F. Or I can use a personal haolgen far-infrared
heater aiming at me a few feet away, set at the lowest level using 350
watts. Which costs less? You would think the latter is cheaper because
the heat is localized. But it's continuous as opposed to the house
heater coming on and off. And also the house heater uses gas, which
costs less than electricity. If I didn't make myself clear, let me
know. Thanks.

Sad that our standard of living has fallen so far that middle-class
Americans are puzzling over arcane heating options in the scramble to
save pennies.

Welcome to the third world.
--
Work is the curse of the drinking class.

On Feb 3, 7:59*pm, Yong Huang wrote:
Let's say I stay upstairs alone in a 2600 sq ft 2-story house. I can
turn on the gas heater of the house for upstairs only, set the
thermostat to (say) 70 F. Or I can use a personal haolgen far-infrared
heater aiming at me a few feet away, set at the lowest level using 350
watts. Which costs less? You would think the latter is cheaper because
the heat is localized. But it's continuous as opposed to the house
heater coming on and off. And also the house heater uses gas, which
costs less than electricity. If I didn't make myself clear, let me
know. Thanks.

To know you have to run a comparison of cost bet Btu of Ng and
electric, For me electricity is double the cost of Ng, I bet its the
same for you so Ng is cheaper unlesss your heating system is very old
and out of tune, but even with my 83% boiler I find electricity to
expensive.

On 2/3/2011 8:59 PM, Yong Huang wrote:
Let's say I stay upstairs alone in a 2600 sq ft 2-story house. I can
turn on the gas heater of the house for upstairs only, set the
thermostat to (say) 70 F. Or I can use a personal haolgen far-infrared
heater aiming at me a few feet away, set at the lowest level using 350
watts. Which costs less?

The 350 W is going to be far cheaper. But how much will it warm you, and
what if you have to move?

Cheaper is often not good.

Jeff


You would think the latter is cheaper because
the heat is localized. But it's continuous as opposed to the house
heater coming on and off. And also the house heater uses gas, which
costs less than electricity. If I didn't make myself clear, let me
know. Thanks.

On Fri, 04 Feb 2011 06:00:48 -0600, Caesar Romano
wrote:


"Yong Huang" wrote in message
...
Let's say I stay upstairs alone in a 2600 sq ft 2-story house. I can
turn on the gas heater of the house for upstairs only, set the
thermostat to (say) 70 F. Or I can use a personal haolgen far-infrared
heater aiming at me a few feet away, set at the lowest level using 350
watts. Which costs less? You would think the latter is cheaper because
the heat is localized. But it's continuous as opposed to the house
heater coming on and off. And also the house heater uses gas, which
costs less than electricity. If I didn't make myself clear, let me
know. Thanks.

Sad that our standard of living has fallen so far that middle-class
Americans are puzzling over arcane heating options in the scramble to
save pennies.

Welcome to the third world.

Arcane is a good word for that. Pretty extreme.
OTOH I never liked heating where it's unnecessary.
Not even about the money, just don't like it.
Something to do with "clean your plate" and "waste not, want not"
psychology.
My house is half the sq ft and I don't like heating it all, or keeping
the temp above 68.
But I have a wife to keep peace with.
Without her around I'd get me a snowmobile suit and keep the heat just
high enough so nothing was damaged and my fingers didn't numb up.

--Vic

On Feb 4, 8:28*am, Jeff Thies wrote:
On 2/3/2011 8:59 PM, Yong Huang wrote:

Let's say I stay upstairs alone in a 2600 sq ft 2-story house. I can
turn on the gas heater of the house for upstairs only, set the
thermostat to (say) 70 F. Or I can use a personal haolgen far-infrared
heater aiming at me a few feet away, set at the lowest level using 350
watts. Which costs less?

The 350 W is going to be far cheaper. But how much will it warm you, and
what if you have to move?

Cheaper is often not good.

* *Jeff

* You would think the latter is cheaper because



the heat is localized. But it's continuous as opposed to the house
heater coming on and off. And also the house heater uses gas, which
costs less than electricity. If I didn't make myself clear, let me
know. Thanks.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Running 350w 24/7 would add about 50$ to my bill, it may cost alot
less to use Ng and heat better

On Fri, 04 Feb 2011 09:54:03 -0600, Vic Smith
wrote Re Use house heating or
halogen far-infrared heater for one person?:

On Fri, 04 Feb 2011 06:00:48 -0600, Caesar Romano
wrote:


"Yong Huang" wrote in message
...
Let's say I stay upstairs alone in a 2600 sq ft 2-story house. I can
turn on the gas heater of the house for upstairs only, set the
thermostat to (say) 70 F. Or I can use a personal haolgen far-infrared
heater aiming at me a few feet away, set at the lowest level using 350
watts. Which costs less? You would think the latter is cheaper because
the heat is localized. But it's continuous as opposed to the house
heater coming on and off. And also the house heater uses gas, which
costs less than electricity. If I didn't make myself clear, let me
know. Thanks.

Sad that our standard of living has fallen so far that middle-class
Americans are puzzling over arcane heating options in the scramble to
save pennies.

Welcome to the third world.

Arcane is a good word for that. Pretty extreme.
OTOH I never liked heating where it's unnecessary.
Not even about the money, just don't like it.
Something to do with "clean your plate" and "waste not, want not"
psychology.
My house is half the sq ft and I don't like heating it all, or keeping
the temp above 68.
But I have a wife to keep peace with.
Without her around I'd get me a snowmobile suit and keep the heat just
high enough so nothing was damaged and my fingers didn't numb up.

I pretty much agree with that, particularly the "clean your plate" and
"waste not, want not" ethos. That was part of my upbringing, and its
a large part of who I am. It really isn't the $$ (particularly at
this late stage of my life) but rather it's about implementing a
"minimalist" life style because that's what I believe in.

On the other hand, many of those now struggling with cost saving
options are only doing it because they are hurting financially. From
what I observe, the minimalist ethos was never previously an important
part of their philosophy. They were people who formerly lived "large"
but now can't do it anymore. (I'm not referring to the OP, but to
what I see around me).
--
Work is the curse of the drinking class.

On Thu, 3 Feb 2011 17:59:39 -0800 (PST), Yong Huang
wrote:
I can use a personal haolgen far-infrared
heater aiming at me a few feet away

Another factor is that with a radiant heater as you describe, the heat
is VERY localized, considerably more so than even an electric space
heater under a desk. The radiant heat is not transferred to the air
and then to you, but directly from the heater to you via the
radiation. (Of course it does some heating of the air too, but the
radiant part is direct.)

The way to answer the question, though, is to check the BTU rating of
the gas heater. Then time how long the gas heater runs to keep the
house and a comfortable temperature, and how long it runs at a lower
setting. Then time how long the radiant heater runs to keep you warm
when the house is cooler. (A Kill-a-Watt meter can help you.) That
will give you the raw data to make the calculation.

If you consistently remember to turn off the radiant heater when you
move away from it, then naturally it costs less. You have to judge
what your patterns would be, since people differ on this.

Edward

On Fri, 04 Feb 2011 10:43:46 -0600, Caesar Romano
wrote:




On the other hand, many of those now struggling with cost saving
options are only doing it because they are hurting financially. From
what I observe, the minimalist ethos was never previously an important
part of their philosophy. They were people who formerly lived "large"
but now can't do it anymore. (I'm not referring to the OP, but to
what I see around me).

Yeah, I got that.
Wouldn't be as much adjustment if they were used to living "small."
Might not even be necessary.
But people are very adaptable.
In re to your "third world" comment, adaptability is a good thing when
welfare beckons the formerly flush.

--Vic

On Fri, 04 Feb 2011 12:24:17 -0600, Vic Smith
wrote Re Use house heating or
halogen far-infrared heater for one person?:


On the other hand, many of those now struggling with cost saving
options are only doing it because they are hurting financially. From
what I observe, the minimalist ethos was never previously an important
part of their philosophy. They were people who formerly lived "large"
but now can't do it anymore. (I'm not referring to the OP, but to
what I see around me).

Yeah, I got that.
Wouldn't be as much adjustment if they were used to living "small."
Might not even be necessary.
But people are very adaptable.
In re to your "third world" comment, adaptability is a good thing when
welfare beckons the formerly flush.

Very true ideed.
--
Work is the curse of the drinking class.

this late stage of my life) but rather it's about implementing a
"minimalist" life style because that's what I believe in.

I like a minimalist life style. It not only saves money, but is good
to your mental health as well. I believe, everything being equal, a
person demanding less lives a longer life.

The reason I asked the question in this thread is because I was
wondering if using the house heater would save me more (looks like
not). I work from home a few days a week. Kids and wife are all gone
during the day. So I want to heat my own body only. But as others
remind me, I won't let the house stay too cold causing damage to the
floor, etc.