The Lemon Fool

drFfybes wrote:

"You are getting confused between two very similarly named implementations of the same technology - air to air, and air to water. I really don't blame you, we had exactly the same problem when we started to look at them."

Thanks for your input. It all helps.

You are correct. I am a bit confused about some of the systems currently emerging for replacing GCH.

As well as doing more research on infrared I will be looking for someone with knowledge of all the current options and their suitability for my situation. An architect maybe?

Y

servodude wrote:

BullDog wrote:I suspect the final analysis is that nobody here has converted their house wholly to IR heating from other forms of heat. That speaks volumes, I think.

If I were to be forced to abandon my gas boiler, the only realistic electric alternative I can see is storage heaters. I have a 7.5p overnight tariff for my BEV but that could equally be deployed in running storage heaters. The cost per kwhr of the off peak electricity would then be about equal to my gas tariff. But then of course, I would I fact need more space in the rooms than is presently taken up by CH radiators.

Storage heaters are a terrible user experience, having to decide how warm or cold you might feel tomorrow?

Why not store the electricity rather than the heat?
Battery packs can't be much bigger than storage heaters, and I'm pretty sure that by the time such a conversion would be necessary there will be decent options for interfacing in to legacy radiator systems

I agree with you. However, the battery pack needed to support upto a 100kwhr per day isn't really a practical or an affordable proposition.

In such a case, I think it would be more practical to store the heat outside in a large thermal store.

None of those "solutions" are really sensible and I expect to be one of those who installs a new gas boiler in 2034 and buys at least one more boiler as a spare.

yieldhog wrote:drFfybes wrote:

"You are getting confused between two very similarly named implementations of the same technology - air to air, and air to water. I really don't blame you, we had exactly the same problem when we started to look at them."

Thanks for your input. It all helps.

You are correct. I am a bit confused about some of the systems currently emerging for replacing GCH.

As well as doing more research on infrared I will be looking for someone with knowledge of all the current options and their suitability for my situation. An architect maybe?

Y

An architect asks a HVAC specialist.

BullDog wrote:

servodude wrote:
Storage heaters are a terrible user experience, having to decide how warm or cold you might feel tomorrow?

Why not store the electricity rather than the heat?
Battery packs can't be much bigger than storage heaters, and I'm pretty sure that by the time such a conversion would be necessary there will be decent options for interfacing in to legacy radiator systems

I agree with you. However, the battery pack needed to support upto a 100kwhr per day isn't really a practical or an affordable proposition.

In such a case, I think it would be more practical to store the heat outside in a large thermal store.

None of those "solutions" are really sensible and I expect to be one of those who installs a new gas boiler in 2034 and buys at least one more boiler as a spare.

100kWhr per day seems "a lot"... for big values of a lot.
That's like having four electric bars on all day?

But even if that is your required target at present, with ASHP I would expect the required figure to be nearer a third of that for the same heat? If not lower?

And your storage would be needed to offset only the bit that's not being directly used during the night (so two thirds depending on the tariff timing)

This is all still bearing in mind that the charging of electricity is a fantasy based solely on maintaining the appearance of a market for legacy generators.
At some point I expect the cost of wind generated electricity to the consumer to more closely match the facts

servodude wrote:

BullDog wrote:I agree with you. However, the battery pack needed to support upto a 100kwhr per day isn't really a practical or an affordable proposition.

In such a case, I think it would be more practical to store the heat outside in a large thermal store.

None of those "solutions" are really sensible and I expect to be one of those who installs a new gas boiler in 2034 and buys at least one more boiler as a spare.

100kWhr per day seems "a lot"... for big values of a lot.
That's like having four electric bars on all day?

But even if that is your required target at present, with ASHP I would expect the required figure to be nearer a third of that for the same heat? If not lower?

And your storage would be needed to offset only the bit that's not being directly used during the night (so two thirds depending on the tariff timing)

This is all still bearing in mind that the charging of electricity is a fantasy based solely on maintaining the appearance of a market for legacy generators.
At some point I expect the cost of wind generated electricity to the consumer to more closely match the facts

Don't disagree.

100kwhr a day is my gas consumption on colder winter days. Can be more on very cold days. Heat pump usually has a CoP of about 3. Running a heat pump under those conditions though, the CoP rapidly drops and can even fall to 1 on the coldest of days. It's interesting but academic, it's not going to happen here.

BullDog wrote:

servodude wrote:
100kWhr per day seems "a lot"... for big values of a lot.
That's like having four electric bars on all day?

But even if that is your required target at present, with ASHP I would expect the required figure to be nearer a third of that for the same heat? If not lower?

And your storage would be needed to offset only the bit that's not being directly used during the night (so two thirds depending on the tariff timing)

This is all still bearing in mind that the charging of electricity is a fantasy based solely on maintaining the appearance of a market for legacy generators.
At some point I expect the cost of wind generated electricity to the consumer to more closely match the facts

Don't disagree.

100kwhr a day is my gas consumption on colder winter days. Can be more on very cold days. Heat pump usually has a CoP of about 3. Running a heat pump under those conditions though, the CoP rapidly drops and can even fall to 1 on the coldest of days. It's interesting but academic, it's not going to happen here.

Isn't the academic part is how storage would affect the cost over the year?
I don't doubt that extreme days throw the calcs out - but with storage they do so in both directions.

yieldhog wrote:
As well as doing more research on infrared I will be looking for someone with knowledge of all the current options and their suitability for my situation. An architect maybe?

Unless you are in dire need of replacing the gas boiler, the first thing to do would be to wait a year or 2 for the new technologies to become established.

You certainly don't want an architect, someone who specialises in air con or heat pumps would be a lot better. HVAC stands for Heating Ventilation and Air Con - usually more commercial based, but see whatis local to you.

Paul

servodude wrote:

XFool wrote:Why is short-wave infra-red "very dangerous indeed"? After all, very short-wave "infra-red" is just red light!

To put it another way, if short-wave infra-red is "very dangerous indeed", then sunlight must be lethal! Vampires, beware?

Is somebody confusing infra-red with ultra-violet, here?

SWIR will burn through your retina before you realise it.
A CD laser is 780nm so just invisible enough that there is some energy bleeding in to the visible to give the bright red dot you might have seen (DVD are down in the visible so seem "scary as" if you've been used to the older things). Even in a reader where the power is ~1.5mW it's in an area about 20um wide - typically a burner will be pulsing up around the 30-40mW.

But do any domestic infra-red heaters really use lasers (where all the energy is on a spot frequency)? I'd have thought they just used 'hot things'.

XFool wrote:

servodude wrote:SWIR will burn through your retina before you realise it.
A CD laser is 780nm so just invisible enough that there is some energy bleeding in to the visible to give the bright red dot you might have seen (DVD are down in the visible so seem "scary as" if you've been used to the older things). Even in a reader where the power is ~1.5mW it's in an area about 20um wide - typically a burner will be pulsing up around the 30-40mW.

But do any domestic infra-red heaters really use lasers (where all the energy is on a spot frequency)? I'd have thought they just used 'hot things'.

It won't be lasered for a space heater - but it doesn't need to be to be to be risky.... and the nature of the heating doesn't change the aspects of SWIR that make it a (relatively more) dangerous part of the spectrum. You don't get the sensations of heat or light to warn you to look away.

You alluded to UV and it's similar in that by the time you notice the damage it's already done.

I get on fine with my storage heaters. I look at the weather and adjust the input as required.

Tedx wrote:I get on fine with my storage heaters. I look at the weather and adjust the input as required.

I did the same over Xmas; we had one in the bedroom we used at my folks.
I could live with it if I needed to (it was the only option in my first Embra hovel).. doesn't mean it isn't wasteful or a shite user experience once you're used to other options

When you work at home all day it gives a pleasant 24 hour a day warmth to my well insulated, south facing property. And zero maintenance & 100% green. I've had expensive problems with gas boilers in the past that kind of stick in the throat.

Saying that, I am in discussions with a company to provide an air to water heat pump/central heating system.

But oh my, the upheaval. And the huge amount of extra gear that's needed, just to do what I've already got.

Tedx wrote:I get on fine with my storage heaters. I look at the weather and adjust the input as required.

I imagine it's only a matter of time before storage heaters get smart enough to do that themselves. In fact some may already be smart enough to self adjust depending on weather information?

I think I alluded to that some time ago. Our heaters charge up overnight on E7 but you'd think that we're not to far away from an intelligent tariff/storage heater where you can soak up excess renewable generation regardless of the time of day.

Tedx wrote:I think I alluded to that some time ago. Our heaters charge up overnight on E7 but you'd think that we're not to far away from an intelligent tariff/storage heater where you can soak up excess renewable generation regardless of the time of day.

Indeed. That's exactly what the Intelligent Octopus tariff does for charging a BEV. You get a standard off peak period between 11.30pm and 05.30am. But when you plug in the BEV the Intelligent Octopus tariff decides when to charge and when not to charge. That's using a clever Ohme charge point. It seems to work extremely well. It would appear to me to be extremely simple to do the same thing with thermal storage.

Tedx wrote:And zero maintenance

You are fortunate. Maybe your storage heaters are not as old as the ones in the apartment blocks where I live? About 50% of my call-outs here are for storage heaters that no longer get hot. The failures, in order of frequency, have been: thermal cut-outs tripping even though the heater is not overheating, wiring becoming so corroded that it disconnects itself (like an ultra slow-blowing fuse), and thermostats mysteriously ceasing to connect.

To be fair I think the storage heaters in these apartments were all installed a very long time ago, not when they were built in the sixties as they had single-storage-heater plus warm air ducts (like mine still has), but sometime perhaps in the seventies or eighties.

C.

csearle wrote:To be fair I think the storage heaters in these apartments were all installed a very long time ago, not when they were built in the sixties as they had single-storage-heater plus warm air ducts (like mine still has), but sometime perhaps in the seventies or eighties.

During one of my impoverished phases I had a two-bed terraced house, built around 1975, which had actually been done properly for a change. The single (but fairly large) storage heater in the main downstairs room coped brilliantly even with the 1981/82 winter, when I couldn't get to work for a fortnight because the snowploughs couldn't get through the 8 foot drifts on the hills south of Bath.

Overnight on Economy 7, of course. And the only control it had was a single flap which you kept closed until 6 pm, whereupon it would get a second wind that would see you through the evening. Remarkable what could be achieved with simple means if the building had been done right.

BJ

yieldhog wrote:I do not see any downside to infrared, combined with solar panels and a log-burner.

Well you need to think about the future of log burners, they're already effectively banned in London and in smoke control areas (ie most towns and cities in England), they are restricted to 3g/hour of smoke. So the downsides of log burners depends on where you live.

BullDog wrote: Heat pump usually has a CoP of about 3. Running a heat pump under those conditions though, the CoP rapidly drops and can even fall to 1 on the coldest of days. It's interesting but academic, it's not going to happen here.

Not true of modern systems.

A government project installed 742 heat pumps in a range of properties in southern England, Tyneside and Scotland in 2020-1. They deliberately installed a range of types, so weren't just doing "the best" models and found a median CoP across the year of 2.80, dropping to 2.44 "on the coldest days of the year".

They also found that although high-temperature heat pumps are about 10% less efficient than "cooler" ones, in the real world they use high temperatures so infrequently that there's no real hit to CoP.

They found 15% of properties needed more loft insulation, a handful of the 742 needed more insulation work like cavity etc, but given that 22% of properties were pre-WWII and 8% were pre-1920, that's maybe not surprising; overall message is that this is a solution that is mainstream now.

Hallucigenia wrote:

yieldhog wrote:I do not see any downside to infrared, combined with solar panels and a log-burner.

Well you need to think about the future of log burners, they're already effectively banned in London and in smoke control areas (ie most towns and cities in England), they are restricted to 3g/hour of smoke. So the downsides of log burners depends on where you live.

BullDog wrote: Heat pump usually has a CoP of about 3. Running a heat pump under those conditions though, the CoP rapidly drops and can even fall to 1 on the coldest of days. It's interesting but academic, it's not going to happen here.

Not true of modern systems.

A government project installed 742 heat pumps in a range of properties in southern England, Tyneside and Scotland in 2020-1. They deliberately installed a range of types, so weren't just doing "the best" models and found a median CoP across the year of 2.80, dropping to 2.44 "on the coldest days of the year".

They also found that although high-temperature heat pumps are about 10% less efficient than "cooler" ones, in the real world they use high temperatures so infrequently that there's no real hit to CoP.

They found 15% of properties needed more loft insulation, a handful of the 742 needed more insulation work like cavity etc, but given that 22% of properties were pre-WWII and 8% were pre-1920, that's maybe not surprising; overall message is that this is a solution that is mainstream now.

The “best” models are getting to be pretty good indeed; e.g. https://www.pv-magazine.com/2023/12/06/ ... rom-italy/

and with respect to Infra-red systems, I watched this some time ago: https://yt.artemislena.eu/watch?v=0Nb5AfCh0GI Quite persuasive.

Hallucigenia wrote:

yieldhog wrote:I do not see any downside to infrared, combined with solar panels and a log-burner.

A government project[/url] installed 742 heat pumps in a range of properties in southern England, Tyneside and Scotland in 2020-1. They deliberately installed a range of types, so weren't just doing "the best" models and found a median CoP across the year of 2.80, dropping to 2.44 "on the coldest days of the year".
...overall message is that this is a solution that is mainstream now.

I imagine that by the 2030s they may be a viable swap-in for the average wet gas system. Possible caveat for microbore?
Provided they can grow the industry by persuading peeps to buy the less effective systems currently on offer between now and 2030s.

V8 (C17 stone shack, storage heaters, c1972).