Hi,

I have always been an avid supporter of underfloor heating -- I don't
know anyone personally to have any complaints about them. However in
telling people here in Ireland that we installed it in a stone house
we are renovating, almost everybody is "appalled" and skeptical. They
tell us stories of people who have them installed and get them ripped
out soon afterwards because of the gas guzzling/high heating costs. I
can only think that in these bad experiences, the insulation under the
floor and on the walls is improperly done, but they insist that this
possibility is unlikely and that underfloor heating is an inherently
disastrous heating method. But I don't see how something that is so
successful and common elsewhere remains so successful if that is the
case. I'm tired of defending the choice we made with the heating :-(

Anybody have ideas on the possible sources of bad experiences/high
running costs with underfloor heating?

Thanks,
g

On 5 Sep 2003 10:52:40 -0700, (g) wrote:


they insist that this
possibility is unlikely and that underfloor heating is an inherently
disastrous heating method. But I don't see how something that is so
successful and common elsewhere remains so successful if that is the
case. I'm tired of defending the choice we made with the heating :-(

Anybody have ideas on the possible sources of bad experiences/high
running costs with underfloor heating.

Electric underfloor heating quite rightly got a bad name for cost and
poor installation as it was a favourite in a number of council built
houses in the 60's and, in true council fashion, was badly designed
and installed.

The experience with water systems is, as you say quite the reverse.
On a sample of 1 my neighbour and I have identically sized houses
built to more or less the same design and the same insulation
standards 10 years ago. Both were self build - he installed
conventional heating I used underfloor. Both use mains gas. The
pattern of occupation of both houses is similar but the heating costs
for mine are consistently 15-20% less than his.

--
Peter Parry.
http://www.wpp.ltd.uk/

In message , Peter Parry
wrote

The
pattern of occupation of both houses is similar but the heating costs
for mine are consistently 15-20% less than his.


But surely no meaningful conclusion can be drawn from a sample of 2. I
have friends that want their house heated to temperatures that I find
uncomfortable - their house temperature may be only a few degrees
higher.

I know of some people that have tuned on the heating for short periods
to 'take the chill off' in the last week. My heating is still off.

--
Alan

"Peter Parry" wrote in message
...
On 5 Sep 2003 10:52:40 -0700, (g) wrote:


they insist that this
possibility is unlikely and that underfloor heating is an inherently
disastrous heating method. But I don't see how something that is so
successful and common elsewhere remains so successful if that is the
case. I'm tired of defending the choice we made with the heating :-(

Anybody have ideas on the possible sources of bad experiences/high
running costs with underfloor heating.

Electric underfloor heating quite rightly
got a bad name for cost and
poor installation as it was a favourite in
a number of council built houses in the
60's and, in true council fashion, was badly designed
and installed.

Not correct. Most were in private homes. If gas is available councils
always went for gas fired heating as it is 1/4 of the price of electricity
to run.




---
--

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.507 / Virus Database: 304 - Release Date: 04/08/2003

On Sun, 7 Sep 2003 11:32:20 +0100, "IMM" wrote:

"Peter Parry" wrote in message
.. .

Electric underfloor heating quite rightly
got a bad name for cost and
poor installation as it was a favourite in
a number of council built houses in the
60's and, in true council fashion, was badly designed
and installed.

Not correct. Most were in private homes.

According to the BRI 80% of electric underfloor installations were in
public housing. During the Wilson Callaghan era there was a policy
of installing oil, gas and electricity in equal mixes in public
housing, the cheapest fuels were electricity and oil.

gas is available councils
always went for gas fired heating as it is 1/4 of the price of electricity
to run.

Not then.

--
Peter Parry.
http://www.wpp.ltd.uk/

"Peter Parry" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 7 Sep 2003 11:32:20 +0100, "IMM" wrote:

"Peter Parry" wrote in message
.. .

Electric underfloor heating quite rightly
got a bad name for cost and
poor installation as it was a favourite in
a number of council built houses in the
60's and, in true council fashion, was badly designed
and installed.

Not correct. Most were in private homes.

According to the BRI 80% of electric underfloor installations were in
public housing. During the Wilson Callaghan era there was a policy
of installing oil, gas and electricity in equal mixes in public
housing, the cheapest fuels were electricity and oil.

gas is available councils
always went for gas fired heating as it is 1/4 of the price of
electricity
to run.

Not then.

Gas has always been cheaper than electricity; in the past 40 years anyway.
My UFH electric system was in private house and I knew of few in public
housing. Public housing was going all warm air.


---
--

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.507 / Virus Database: 304 - Release Date: 04/08/2003

On Sun, 7 Sep 2003 16:33:49 +0100, "IMM" wrote:


"Peter Parry" wrote in message
.. .

According to the BRI 80% of electric underfloor installations were in
public housing. During the Wilson Callaghan era there was a policy
of installing oil, gas and electricity in equal mixes in public
housing, the cheapest fuels were electricity and oil.

Gas has always been cheaper than electricity; in the past 40 years anyway.

No it hasn't, oil has quite often been cheaper and in the 60's/70's
off peak electricity was cheaper at times.

My UFH electric system was in private house and I knew of few in public
housing.

Quite possibly, but your knowledge and reality are often a long way
apart.


--
Peter Parry.
http://www.wpp.ltd.uk/

IMM wrote:

"Peter Parry" wrote in message
...

On 5 Sep 2003 10:52:40 -0700, (g) wrote:



they insist that this
possibility is unlikely and that underfloor heating is an inherently
disastrous heating method. But I don't see how something that is so
successful and common elsewhere remains so successful if that is the
case. I'm tired of defending the choice we made with the heating :-(

Anybody have ideas on the possible sources of bad experiences/high
running costs with underfloor heating.

Electric underfloor heating quite rightly
got a bad name for cost and
poor installation as it was a favourite in
a number of council built houses in the
60's and, in true council fashion, was badly designed
and installed.


Not correct. Most were in private homes. If gas is available councils
always went for gas fired heating as it is 1/4 of the price of electricity
to run.


So? It also costs about 3 times as much to install. Who pays for fiuel?
Who pays for installation?

Go figure (assuming your un snotty Uni taught you (a) the meaning of the
word and (b() how to do it).






---
--

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.507 / Virus Database: 304 - Release Date: 04/08/2003

"g" wrote in message
om...
Hi,

I have always been an avid supporter of underfloor heating -- I don't
know anyone personally to have any complaints about them. However in
telling people here in Ireland that we installed it in a stone house
we are renovating, almost everybody is "appalled" and skeptical. They
tell us stories of people who have them installed and get them ripped
out soon afterwards because of the gas guzzling/high heating costs. I
can only think that in these bad experiences, the insulation under the
floor and on the walls is improperly done, but they insist that this
possibility is unlikely and that underfloor heating is an inherently
disastrous heating method. But I don't see how something that is so
successful and common elsewhere remains so successful if that is the
case. I'm tired of defending the choice we made with the heating :-(

Anybody have ideas on the possible sources of bad experiences/high
running costs with underfloor heating?

In this months Selfbuild and Design mag there is an article on heating
systems by an eco expert. Underfloor heating was ruled out in poorly
insulted houses (which may be the case in Ireland) and only deemed suitable
in homes with, or just above, current building regs insulation levels. High
insulation levels were better suited to forced air heat recovery ventilation
systems.

The design of UFH has to be right, with no cold spots in the floors, "high"
insulation under the floors and "very" good control. A condensing boiler is
now virtually mandatory for economy. If all points are not right then it
may be a disaster.






---
--

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.507 / Virus Database: 304 - Release Date: 04/08/2003

IMM wrote:

"g" wrote in message
om...

Hi,

I have always been an avid supporter of underfloor heating -- I don't
know anyone personally to have any complaints about them. However in
telling people here in Ireland that we installed it in a stone house
we are renovating, almost everybody is "appalled" and skeptical. They
tell us stories of people who have them installed and get them ripped
out soon afterwards because of the gas guzzling/high heating costs. I
can only think that in these bad experiences, the insulation under the
floor and on the walls is improperly done, but they insist that this
possibility is unlikely and that underfloor heating is an inherently
disastrous heating method. But I don't see how something that is so
successful and common elsewhere remains so successful if that is the
case. I'm tired of defending the choice we made with the heating :-(

Anybody have ideas on the possible sources of bad experiences/high
running costs with underfloor heating?


In this months Selfbuild and Design mag there is an article on heating
systems by an eco expert. Underfloor heating was ruled out in poorly
insulted houses (which may be the case in Ireland)


On the contrary, people have been insulting the Irish and their houses
for decades.

You must try harder to get your facts right. gamma minus.


(usual ill informed drivel deleted)

In this months Selfbuild and Design mag there is an article on heating
systems by an eco expert. Underfloor heating was ruled out in poorly
insulted houses (which may be the case in Ireland)

It's pointless for us to insulate cos we have to keep the kitchen door open
all the time to let the pigs run in and out.

Suzanne
The Irish are a fair people, they never speak well of one another.
Samuel Johnson

g wrote:

Hi,

I have always been an avid supporter of underfloor heating -- I don't
know anyone personally to have any complaints about them. However in
telling people here in Ireland that we installed it in a stone house
we are renovating, almost everybody is "appalled" and skeptical. They
tell us stories of people who have them installed and get them ripped
out soon afterwards because of the gas guzzling/high heating costs. I
can only think that in these bad experiences, the insulation under the
floor and on the walls is improperly done, but they insist that this
possibility is unlikely and that underfloor heating is an inherently
disastrous heating method. But I don't see how something that is so
successful and common elsewhere remains so successful if that is the
case. I'm tired of defending the choice we made with the heating :-(

Anybody have ideas on the possible sources of bad experiences/high
running costs with underfloor heating?



With decent insulation and a wet system - i.e. not electric - its pretty
close to a conventional system.

What I find is that teh longer delays mean it spends a fair time warming
up and colling down, and this represents a little bit of heat you
probably wouldn't have used if it came yup to temp faater.

Do a decent insulation job and go for it. If you want to be very clever,
bt in zone valves and thermostats for every room. Then buold a
controller than can cope with all of that on a different basis from the
rest of the CH.

Its possible to vastly overheat if you don't have some way of ensuring
each room is at the right temp.





Thanks,
g