[HN Gopher] Suddenly everyone wants 'super-hot' heat pumps
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Suddenly everyone wants 'super-hot' heat pumps
        
       Author : ZeroGravitas
       Score  : 135 points
       Date   : 2022-09-04 12:02 UTC (10 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (norwegianscitechnews.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (norwegianscitechnews.com)
        
       | jwie wrote:
       | Heat pumps are air conditioning systems. They work on the
       | refrigeration cycle.
       | 
       | Rural homes in the US tend not to have connections to natural gas
       | utilities. If winter isn't severe enough to justify a storage
       | tank, the home typically has an HVAC heat pump/AC unit, and
       | really high electric bills for a month or two.
       | 
       | Heat pumps have gotten better, but they're never a first choice
       | for heating for good reasons. Like most "emissions saving"
       | initiatives the crux of it is where the electricity comes from.
       | 
       | Burning something for heat is always more effective, cheaper, and
       | produces fewer emissions compared to an electric heater. Heat
       | pumps need to power a compressor, while there's some phase change
       | and pressure hacks to move the heat around, systematically it's
       | trading electricity for heat.
       | 
       | If you're getting electric heat from coal fired steam that's
       | always worse than burning the coal locally to heat something, and
       | this is true for all emission-producing power sources.
        
         | ctur wrote:
         | What? No, this is incredibly short-sighted. It overlooks the
         | fact that much grid energy is renewable already and will become
         | more so in the future. Go with electric sources for cooking and
         | heating (home and water), then let the grid handle being
         | renewable.
         | 
         | Heat pumps are amazing technology and moving heat, vs
         | generating it, is incredibly efficient and clean.
         | 
         | Do not burn fissile fuels in your home.
        
           | sokoloff wrote:
           | > Do not burn _fissile_ fuels in your home.
           | 
           | Completely agree; that would be incredibly dangerous and
           | polluting (and probably illegal)!
        
           | tialaramex wrote:
           | Buffy had it right, "Fire bad, tree pretty".
        
         | tialaramex wrote:
         | You seem to have only half understood?
         | 
         | The heat pump is only _moving_ the heat. Burning coal doesn 't
         | move heat, it _makes_ heat by destroying coal. Because the heat
         | pump isn 't _making_ the heat it is able to _move_ the same
         | amount of heat from somewhere else (say, the outside air) into
         | your home, using _less_ energy than you 'd need to _make_ that
         | heat inside your home.
         | 
         | Because you can't destroy heat (thermodynamics) for
         | refrigerators we have no choice, we must use heat pumps. But
         | once you get good at this technology, it's just better
         | regardless of whether you want to move the heat away (Air
         | conditioning, refrigerator) or towards you (heating a home).
         | 
         | This is how heat pumps claim seriously > 100% efficiency in
         | many cases, they're comparing the efficiency of moving heat
         | against making it.
        
           | phyzome wrote:
           | It's important for people to know that at least when it comes
           | to heating, "100% efficiency" is actually the _worst possible
           | efficiency_. That 's just thermodynamics. You can only get
           | better than that.
        
             | saltcured wrote:
             | No, you can get much worse as well when considering heating
             | in general.
             | 
             | Heating efficiency is a measure of useful heat, so while of
             | course energy is conserved in the universe, it is not 100%
             | efficiency as measured, where we consider the consumed
             | energy versus the successful heating of the home. Heat lost
             | to the outside is inefficient.
             | 
             | With natural gas heating, efficiency used to be around 50%
             | as the exhaust gases were quite hot. They just had passive
             | chimney flues driven by natural convection. Improvements to
             | recover more of that heat brought efficiency up to 80% and
             | now approaching 95% in the most modern configurations that
             | I've read about. They now require mechanical ventilation to
             | remove the exhaust and also have condensate drains because
             | the heat exchangers cool the gases so much.
             | 
             | Of course, something like a traditional wood fireplace is
             | much worse than even those old gas furnaces, with a vast
             | amount of energy going out the chimney.
        
             | tialaramex wrote:
             | While this is true in some sort of physical sense, it's not
             | really _useful_ for home heating. The problem is that while
             | burning stuff makes heat, that heat probably isn 't where
             | you wanted it, and you need to capture the heat and move it
             | to where it's useful. Unfortunately burning stuff produces
             | exhaust gases, and those too are hot, that is they contain
             | some of the valuable heat, but the gases themselves are
             | dangerous and unwanted.
             | 
             | Modern boilers achieve about 94% efficiency. That is, if we
             | make 1MJ of heat energy by setting stuff on fire, the
             | boiler transfers 940 kJ of heat energy into hot water. The
             | remaining 60 kJ is warm exhaust. You've probably seen the
             | exhaust from people's homes if you live somewhere with such
             | boilers.
        
         | legulere wrote:
         | Heat pumps produce several times the heat as electricity put
         | in. Even with a typical 40%-50% efficiency for a gas power
         | plant you end up with more than 100% efficiency with a heat
         | pump. If the power plant rest heat is used for instance for
         | district heating you reach efficiency of around 90%. Add the
         | efficiency of heat pumps on top and you end up with something
         | very good.
        
         | throwaway894345 wrote:
         | Heat pumps transfer heat from the outside, they aren't
         | generating it so it's entirely likely that they would result in
         | fewer net emissions than burning coal directly. And the
         | calculus just keeps getting better for grids that incorporate
         | more natural gas and renewables.
        
         | KVFinn wrote:
         | >Burning something for heat is always more effective, cheaper,
         | and produces fewer emissions compared to an electric heater...
         | >If you're getting electric heat from coal fired steam that's
         | always worse than burning the coal locally to heat something,
         | and this is true for all emission-producing power sources.
         | 
         | Apparently you can actually save natural gas with electric heat
         | and a heat pump.
         | 
         | https://youtu.be/MFEHFsO-XSI
        
         | altcognito wrote:
         | The argument is that for regions that do not spend much time
         | below 15 degrees Fahrenheit, they tend to be cheaper to run
         | because they can pump more heat than electricity they use,
         | effectively becoming 300% efficient instead of 95% efficient
         | for say an gas heater.
         | 
         | As the temperature differential between the desired temperature
         | and the outside temperature increases however, the efficiency
         | does drop and what you say is true, but for most of the
         | populated world, this is not the situation.
         | 
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7J52mDjZzto
         | 
         | (edit: I think you're going to get a lot of links to the overly
         | in depth series tech connections, but I'm leaving it here all
         | the same)
        
         | boloust wrote:
         | Heat pumps can be efficient enough to overcome the losses from
         | coal -> electricity. So it's possible to use a heat pump to
         | heat a space more efficiently than burning that same coal
         | directly in the space.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | brnt wrote:
         | Typical heatpump COP in Northwestern Europe sits at about 4,
         | that means for 1 kWh of electricity your moving 4 kWh heat into
         | your home. Electrical resistive heating sits at 1:1 by
         | definition, and methods like wood, gas or oil, combustive
         | methods, usually with modern installations at 80-95%
         | efficiency. Further south heatpump COP improves; the rule of
         | thumb is a smaller delta T the better.
         | 
         | Moving heat is always more efficient than creating heat. It's
         | elementary physics.
         | 
         | Airconditioners, or air-to-air heatpumps, are cheap heaters for
         | the same reason (any units sold in the last 10 years can move
         | heat bidirectionally). Here in NW Europe by cooling bill is
         | barely noticeable (it's no desert clime after all, although the
         | last decade seems like it's getting there!). You don't need to
         | set it to 18C; I really only cool when the attic gets over 28C
         | while I work there (home office), down to 24-26, which is a few
         | weeks a year. In winter, it heats the room at ~400% efficiency
         | compared to the typical ~80 for gas heating.
         | 
         | Move heat. Don't create it.
        
         | crote wrote:
         | The trick is that heat pumps are using energy to _move heat_.
         | Let 's make an example calculation:
         | 
         | When heating your house to burn coal, you release 1 Joule when
         | burning the coal. It's a small plant, so it is not very
         | efficient. You probably get 0.85 J of heating out of it.
         | 
         | If we instead burn coal in a large-scale modern power plant, we
         | release the same 1 Joule, but capture 0.95 J of it in
         | electricity. Let's say we lose 10% transporting it to your
         | home, leaving 0.855 J remaining. Now, we use that energy to
         | _move_ heat from outside into our home, at an efficiency of
         | about 300% - so for every joule we consume, we move 3 joules of
         | energy. This means our house is heated with 2.565 J. But the
         | energy the heat pump consumes doesn 't disappear - it becomes
         | heat too. So your house gets a total of 3.42 J hotter!
         | 
         | So 1 J of coal gets you either 0.85 J of heat by burning it
         | directly, or 3.42 J of heat by burning it in a power plant and
         | using a heat pump. And of course don't forget that for climate
         | reasons it is trivial to replace that power plant with a solar
         | farm or wind turbine.
         | 
         | The _worst-case_ scenario for a heat pump is that it is exactly
         | as efficient as burning stuff directly. But in _virtually all_
         | cases, it is way better.
        
           | aftbit wrote:
           | Pretty good assessment, except I think your figure for heat
           | efficiency of power generation is way off. I would expect to
           | convert around 30-40% of the heat energy to electricity.
        
       | donny2018 wrote:
       | Is there a heat pump technology that I can just swap my gas
       | furnace to? With no additional insulation requirements and no
       | other strings attached?
        
         | falcolas wrote:
         | Just did this myself, but I augmented our gas furnace, instead
         | of replacing it. The two technologies can work in tandem, if it
         | gets too cold for the heat pump to work efficiently.
         | 
         | You do need more room for the heat exchanger.
         | 
         | But you can also get "mini split" units which are basically
         | single room units.
        
         | SuperQue wrote:
         | Yes. But it depends a bit on the climate where you live. What
         | you're looking for is an air-to-air heat pump. Basically it
         | replaces the outside unit of your traditional air conditioner.
         | But it can heat or cool.
         | 
         | For example:
         | https://www.trane.com/residential/en/products/heat-pumps/
        
           | toast0 wrote:
           | If they only have a gas furnace, then they may not have an
           | outside unit currently. Piping a refrigerant line and
           | signalling from where the furnace is to a suitable location
           | for the outside unit may be easy or hard depending on their
           | home.
           | 
           | Of course, if they have a furnace and an air conditioner,
           | it's a lot easier to change to a heat pump and that's it (or
           | more likely, a heat pump and just in case resistive heating)
        
       | sharpercoder wrote:
       | In my country, I can't install a groundwater heat pump until
       | summer 2023. That's almost a year. Many installation companies do
       | not even take new customers any more.
        
         | ZeroGravitas wrote:
         | It feels like modern air source tech is displacing ground/water
         | source to some degree, I'm not sure exactly when ground source
         | makes sense but it feels like the crossover point has been
         | moving in air sources direction.
         | 
         | Might be worth looking into as the easier install is of course
         | the key benefit.
        
       | belter wrote:
       | When reading many of these articles always miss a condensed
       | explanation of what a Heat Pump really is. In some countries they
       | are common, while in others, seems they are very rare.
       | 
       | "Heating and Cooling With a Heat Pump" -
       | https://www.nrcan.gc.ca/energy-efficiency/energy-star-canada...
       | 
       | "Heat pump" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_pump
        
         | oezi wrote:
         | I haven't understood why they are called heat pumps now when it
         | is essentially the same as a AC.
        
           | toast0 wrote:
           | An heatpump is either an Air Conditioner (which is really
           | jusf a refrigerator) running in reverse, or an A/C with a
           | reversing valve so it can move (pump) heat in either
           | direction, depending on the application. Heat pump driers and
           | water heaters never cool the clothes or the water, but home
           | heat pumps are almost always setup for heating or cooling.
        
         | ChuckNorris89 wrote:
         | Regardless of implementation, a heat pump is basically a
         | reverse air conditioner: taking heat energy form outside and
         | brining it in your house. The main components are also the same
         | as an AC: heat exchangers, a compressor, refrigerant fluid and
         | piping.
         | 
         | Where exactly outside you tap in for that heat energy and how
         | the outdoor heat exchangers look like varies depending on
         | implementation, but the principle is the same.
        
           | whoooooo123 wrote:
           | Is there any meaningful difference between a heat pump and an
           | air conditioner, other than the direction the heat is pumped
           | in?
           | 
           | Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that an air conditioner
           | is a type of heat pump?
        
             | jasode wrote:
             | _> Is there any meaningful difference between a heat pump
             | and an air conditioner, other than the direction the heat
             | is pumped in?_
             | 
             | In terms of basic science, they are the same principle so
             | "air conditioner" is a type of "heat pump".
             | 
             | But in terms of _semantics_ that is understood by the
             | general public for purposes of differentiating various HVAC
             | equipment one can buy, a heat pump has an extra reversing
             | valve to change the flow of refrigerant. A standard air
             | conditioner doesn 't have that extra feature.
             | 
             | When folks casually say "heat pumps", they're talking about
             | a _HVAC equipment category_ and not general science
             | principles.
        
             | otikik wrote:
             | US people call them heat pumps because they have been
             | calling the non-reversible cold-only kind "air conditioner"
             | so they needed a new term.
             | 
             | In Europe most units are reversible cold/heat unit so "air
             | conditioning" means making air both colder and hotter. We
             | would call the ACs the Americans have "air coolers", if we
             | needed to make the difference.
        
           | contravariant wrote:
           | Although to be more exact it's a reverse engine, where an
           | engine is a device for turning a temperature gradient into
           | work, and a heat pump is a device for turning work into a
           | temperature gradient.
           | 
           | In this view air conditioners are a kind of heat pump.
        
         | ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
         | Thanks for the links! The Canadian one is great!
        
         | ornornor wrote:
         | Technology connections on YT has a fantastic video on heat
         | pumps, how they work, their energy efficiency... highly
         | recommended
        
           | magic_hamster wrote:
           | TC have a wonderful presentation, but like all YouTube
           | channels, should be taken with a grain of salt. TC made a
           | fair share of errorenous claims, some of which they addressed
           | in follow up videos (definitely not all). One example they
           | never addressed was in their dishwasher video where they
           | explained how a dishwasher worked (which was good) and then
           | pushed to stop using capsules in favor of soap powder. Using
           | powder requires more maintenance because you'll have to buy
           | special salt and run your dishwasher with it but this was
           | never mentioned in the video. The capsules have this so you
           | don't have to add anything else. If you followed their advice
           | blindly, you could damage your dishwasher. Ask technicians
           | what to use and they'll all say the capsules are better for
           | your appliance. Always trust professionals over YouTube
           | videos.
        
             | codewench wrote:
             | The salts issue was actually mentioned in a follow up video
             | [0], with the note that only homes with specific water
             | types (excessively hard water if I remember correctly) will
             | require them.
             | 
             | [0] https://youtu.be/Ll6-eGDpimU?t=2099
        
               | styfle wrote:
               | It seems odd to account for hard water in one appliance
               | but not another.
               | 
               | I've lived in places with hard water and most people have
               | a water softener right next to their water heater so that
               | all water to all appliances in the house is softened.
        
               | ornornor wrote:
               | He says in the video only 1/4 of US homes have softeners.
               | 
               | Every dishwasher I've had in Europe has a salt
               | compartment. I can't remember the ones I had in the US to
               | have a salt compartment. I'd wager the powder and pods in
               | the US have some salt in them to make up for that?
        
             | whatisthiseven wrote:
             | Honestly I dislike TC because he rambles and is too
             | verbose. I don't know why he has recommended so much here.
        
               | ornornor wrote:
               | Because he digs deep in topics that I find interesting. I
               | don't find the rambling annoying, personally.
        
             | tialaramex wrote:
             | "The capsules have this" is only kinda-sorta true as is
             | "special salt".
             | 
             | Lets do "special salt" first. What you need is Sodium
             | Chloride. Commonly: salt. The manufacturer tells you to buy
             | "dishwasher salt" but all that is, is a bag of salt. Why
             | not say just "salt"? Well, the table salt you might buy
             | comes in lots of fancy and/or tweaked varieties which are
             | not ideal for the machine, yet they are more expensive.
             | Instead of buying ten smaller packs of "Genuine Himalayan
             | Rose Salt" for $1.50 each, you should buy the same amount
             | of just regular sodium chloride labelled "Dishwasher salt"
             | in your supermarket in one packet for like $1. As well as
             | irrelevant or potentially undesirable minerals to make it
             | pink (for some reason) salt for food might have a packaging
             | stabilizer, an ingredient added to make sure it doesn't
             | stick together, and iodine salts because sometimes humans
             | don't eat any iodine and if they don't their thyroid gland
             | doesn't work properly which is bad so some public health
             | authorities have local salt tweaked to fix that (salt is
             | chosen because it's really easy). So yeah, TL;DR it's
             | literally salt, it's not special.
             | 
             | Now, do "the capsules have this". Well, they all _say_ they
             | solve this problem, but of course they say that, a
             | manufacturer isn 't going to advertise their product and
             | say "This product is pretty bad really, you probably
             | shouldn't use it". Every manufacturer of "flushable" toilet
             | wipes says their wipes don't cause sewer blockages. The
             | blockages happen. Maybe all the _other_ brands are lying
             | except yours?
             | 
             | Here's why they don't really solve the problem, what your
             | dishwasher wants from salt is a source of ions to re-charge
             | its water softener. Sodium Chloride is (if you remember
             | chemistry class) Sodium ions and Chlorine ions, the
             | softener wants the Sodium ions, it will swap them with the
             | ions from the hard water, softening it. But how much
             | softening is needed? With bulk salt in the machine you
             | don't care. Once a month (or even once a quarter) check the
             | salt, if it's low fill it back up, done. But in a capsule
             | there must be enough softener for each load, or else it
             | gradually gets worse.
             | 
             | Now, it can happen you live somewhere that the water is
             | exactly as hard as the capsule manufacturer decided water
             | should typically be, and for you they work perfectly. Most
             | people don't.
        
               | ornornor wrote:
               | Is it really table salt in big chunks? I didn't
               | realize... I'll dig up the MSDS tomorrow but if so I
               | guess I'll just refill the dishwasher with coarse salt
               | next time I guess rather than the dishwasher variety.
        
               | tialaramex wrote:
               | I've never seen it in "big chunks" but sure, the
               | dishwasher doesn't care, it just wants Sodium Ions.
               | 
               | It seems weird if "coarse salt" is significantly cheaper
               | where you are than dishwasher salt, the main cost
               | difference I'd expect is that the "dishwasher salt"
               | manufacturer is like "This isn't food, so I don't need
               | food inspections" which would make their product cheaper.
               | 
               | I checked my usual suppliers, if I want _fancy_ salt,
               | because I 'm stupid, crazy or rich, I can pay up to PS40
               | per 100 grams for special "black salt" which apparently
               | has rare minerals in it and presumably is aligned with my
               | spiritual ancestors or something?
               | 
               | If I'm content with just salt, NaCl, ordinary crystals of
               | sodium chloride, that's PS0.10 per 100g. I could put that
               | in a dishwasher but...
               | 
               | If I want dishwasher salt, that's PS1 per 1kg, which is
               | the same ratio but larger sizes because unlike fancy
               | specialist salt, nobody buys 100 grams of dishwasher
               | salt.
               | 
               | However, do check your "coarse salt" is actually just
               | salt, it _probably_ doesn 't matter, but the manufacturer
               | doesn't design the machine to have, for example iodine in
               | it, which is often in the table salt in places where
               | iodine deficiency causes medical problem, or an anti-
               | caking agent (to stop it forming "big chunks" when you
               | want to sprinkle it on food) or other food ingredients.
        
           | sokoloff wrote:
           | That video: https://youtu.be/7J52mDjZzto
        
         | ssizn wrote:
         | It sounds like something fancy but it's common where I live.
         | It's usually hot all year round so it made sense to buy an air
         | conditioner with a heat pump built in. Although it's been a few
         | years since we last turned it in because it's never cold enough
         | to justify the electricity usage given the always high prices
         | here in Europe. So perhaps it doesn't even work anymore :P
        
         | ricardobayes wrote:
         | The key as to why is probably lies with the price of gas vs
         | electricity. Countries where natural gas is cheap, you won't
         | find heatpumps.
        
         | LatteLazy wrote:
         | For heat pumps to work, you need well insulated houses. This
         | means you're more likely to get them in colder environments
         | (Canada) than more temperate ones (here in the UK)
        
         | foepys wrote:
         | Everybody already has a small heat pump at home. It's the part
         | that makes the refrigerator cold.
        
         | RandomWorker wrote:
         | It's basically a reversed refrigerator. In the box heat get
         | pumped out from a power temperature to a hotter one the room.
         | Open your fridge door to the outside and the radiator into the
         | home it's done.
        
       | knolan wrote:
       | Your refrigerator is a heat pump. If you put something warm in
       | there its heat is drawn out to the environment heating your
       | kitchen. A refrigerant is used to achieve this. When it's
       | pressure is reduced it will evaporate absorbing thermal energy
       | from its surroundings to change phase. When pumped around it's
       | circuit and compressed and accordingly condenses releasing all
       | that energy to its surroundings. The electrical energy required
       | pumps the fluid and drives the compressor. Of course there will
       | be some heating due to heating of the mechanical components.
       | 
       | A lot of homes here in Ireland (and I presume elsewhere in
       | Europe) must be built to an 'A level' build energy rating. This
       | typically means installing PV Solar or heat pumps. Rarely both.
       | 
       | My modest solar installation on my three year old house only
       | provides about 40% of my electricity needs (typical daily import
       | is 8 kWh and generation is 5 kWh). Winter is a different story.
       | 
       | Most heat pumps here are air to water systems. Homes don't
       | require AC here but you can get air to air systems that can heat
       | or cool your home as needed. The benefit of a heat pump is it's
       | coefficient of performance (CoP). This is the amount of thermal
       | energy you get out for electrical energy put in. A typical system
       | can sustain a CoP of between 3 and 4. However this drops off as
       | the outside temperature drops and you push up the heating
       | demanded.
       | 
       | They should be as reliable and performant as your fridge or AC
       | unit. So you many need to replace the pump or refill the
       | refrigerant.
       | 
       | Another interesting technology is a so called solid state heat
       | pump or thermoelectric module. These have an awful CoP usually
       | much less than unity. They are interesting for thermal management
       | due to their size however. You can aggressively cook a small
       | high-flux component and then deal with the thermal load form the
       | hot side of the TEC with a big cooler. You can even stack them.
       | Their efficiency increases as the temperature difference goes to
       | zero so a stack with a small temperature jump between layers can
       | be better. They also work in reverse and can therefore be used to
       | scavenge electrical power when you have hot and cold reservoirs.
       | For example put one on the exhaust of your car and you can
       | harvest enough energy to charge your phone.
        
         | Scoundreller wrote:
         | > Your refrigerator is a heat pump. If you put something warm
         | in there its heat is drawn out to the environment heating your
         | kitchen.
         | 
         | I've tried to explain to people that putting something warm
         | outside to chill in winter before refrigerating it _costs_ them
         | more in electricity and they look at me like I'm insane.
        
           | yaantc wrote:
           | Parent is right, with some assumptions to be made explicit.
           | Considering the reactions this deserves more explanations ;)
           | 
           | Let's say that the heat energy of the warm thing is "E" and
           | the outside and fridge are at same temp for simplicity. Let's
           | also assume that the house is _not_ heated using a heat pump.
           | 
           | Consider the two cases:
           | 
           | 1) The warm thing is put into a fridge. It's a heat pump,
           | with coefficient of performance C. To cool the thing the
           | fridge will consume E/C, and E will be released as heat
           | inside your room. So you paid E/C of electricity to get E
           | Joules of warming in your home;
           | 
           | 2) The warm thing is put outside. The energy E is wasted
           | outside, and then the piece put into the fridge with no extra
           | cooling there. No energy spent by the fridge, but no warming
           | of the house either. To do a fair comparison with the same
           | final state, we need to add E joules of energy to heat the
           | house, which will require E Joule of electricity or primary
           | energy (because no heat pump to heat the house).
           | 
           | So to reach the same point, in case (1) we spent E/C of
           | heating energy, and E in the second case. It is indeed more
           | efficient to put the warm thing directly into the fridge, as
           | this will contribute to heating the house with the efficiency
           | of a heat pump.
           | 
           | And if you heat your house with a heat pump of same efficient
           | C, you don't care either way: it's equivalent.
        
             | [deleted]
        
           | madacol wrote:
           | I don't understand how that conclusion follows from the
           | quote.
           | 
           | I still think "putting something warm outside to chill in
           | winter before refrigerating" cost _less_ electricity than
           | refrigerating immediately
        
             | Scoundreller wrote:
             | By outside, I mean outdoors.
             | 
             | By bringing "the cold" from outdoors inside, you're going
             | to need an energy source to heat it back up when your home
             | is in heating-mode. Even if you put it inside a small
             | island of cold inside your home.
             | 
             | On a net basis, you've made your home colder.
        
           | ianschmitz wrote:
           | Because what you said doesn't make sense
        
           | knolan wrote:
           | You're going to have to explain your reasoning to me there.
           | 
           | If your fridge is at 4degC and you put something in there at
           | 21degC it will have to transfer an amount of Joules of
           | thermal energy to the internal environment and then the
           | fridge will have to transport that energy out to the kitchen.
           | The amount of energy depends of the specific heat capacity of
           | the item (J/Kg/K). So to drop the temperature of 1kg of stuff
           | from 21degC to 4degC your heat pump needs to work to remove
           | however many Joules the specific heat capacity determines.
           | 
           | If on the other hand if your item is at 0degC then it's going
           | to heat up via heat transfer from the other items in the
           | fridge. This means the internal temperature of the fridge
           | will drop. But this means the heat pump will have to work
           | less to maintain the internal temperature of 4degC. It's not
           | that the fridge attempts to heat the fridge up. The fridge
           | simply works less because no fridge is perfectly insulated so
           | it's easy to let the temperature rise.
        
             | Scoundreller wrote:
             | Because I'm trying to heat my home in winter.
             | 
             | Outside = outside_outside = outdoors.
             | 
             | Not, uhhh, inside outside like the kitchen counter.
        
           | ThunderSizzle wrote:
           | Running the refrigerator requires power. Is that power usage
           | more efficient than not running it and relying on another
           | heat source?
        
             | Scoundreller wrote:
             | > Is that power usage more efficient than not running it
             | and relying on another heat source?
             | 
             | I can't get whether to answer yes or no to that question,
             | but the fridge's heatpump is more cost-efficient that most
             | people's heat sources. That's the entire premise of the
             | article.
        
         | Nextgrid wrote:
         | What's the advantage of an air-to-water heat pump as opposed to
         | an air-to-air system? Why are they used for new buildings,
         | instead of a standard A/C indoor unit which can also offer
         | cooling?
        
           | smileysteve wrote:
           | Water is much more efficient at thermal transfer than air.
           | All of those little brittle fins on the outside, less
           | compressor run time.
           | 
           | It's also better in cold weather for heating as a water mass
           | rarely gets below freezing.
           | 
           | The issues are a water source and corrosion.
        
           | quintushoratius wrote:
           | Other posters are correct that water can transfer heat more
           | efficiently than air, but they're missing or burying the
           | lede:
           | 
           | The temperature is very stable once you dig down a couple of
           | meters. Winter or summer, it's probably an even 10-20 C
           | (depending on your specific location). The ground has
           | tremendous thermal mass and can act as an enormous heat sink.
           | Your little house-sized heat pump isn't going to vary the
           | temperature very much. You can optimize your heat pump to the
           | specific temp range and dump/draw as much heat as you like
           | year round.
        
           | legulere wrote:
           | Heating with air is less efficient in transporting heat with
           | water. So you either need to move more air or heat it up to a
           | higher temperature. The first one is obvious why it's a bad
           | idea, the second is a bad idea as at a certain point the dust
           | in the air is burning up leaving a bad smell. So practically
           | you can heat a house with air heating alone only when they
           | are extremely well insulated or in a mild climate. The
           | passivhaus-Standard in fact is defined by heating through air
           | being enough.
        
           | sokoloff wrote:
           | Water can carry heat around a building more efficiently (in
           | power and space terms) than air.
           | 
           | In a heating dominated climate, this can make sense in a new
           | building. (It's also a good match temperature-wise to in-
           | floor radiant heat.)
           | 
           | In a retrofit situation (such as my house), it also makes
           | sense and is cheaper than running supply and return ducts
           | everywhere.
           | 
           | It's not as good a fit in mixed or cooling-dominated climates
           | (though they can cool as well, but then you have to insulate
           | the pipes much better to prevent condensation).
        
             | Nextgrid wrote:
             | > Water can carry heat around a building more efficiently
             | (in power and space terms) than air.
             | 
             | Heat is carried by the refrigerant though? It only gets
             | "converted" to air in the room itself by the indoor unit.
             | 
             | I am talking about European-style systems where you have
             | A/C units in every room, not the American-style with air
             | ducts distributing air from a central unit in the utility
             | room.
        
               | WastingMyTime89 wrote:
               | > European-style systems where you have A/C units in
               | every room
               | 
               | Which European countries are you talking about? There is
               | no European standard regarding A/C or heating.
        
               | Nextgrid wrote:
               | I didn't mean a formal standard - I checked the
               | definitions and what I'm referring as is that US
               | generally prefers central or "packaged" systems (single
               | big unit in the utility room, air is piped from there
               | into the living space through various ducts) where as
               | Europe prefers "split" systems where you have units in
               | each room with refrigerant pipes going back to the
               | outdoor unit.
        
           | knolan wrote:
           | In our climate there is simply no need for AC as it never
           | gets uncomfortably warm for more than a few days a year. Air
           | to water is used to heat radiators and supply hot water in
           | lieu of gas or oil fired heating. In other climates air to
           | air is more popular and it can be less complex as you don't
           | need all that extra plumbing.
           | 
           | With new builds air to water makes sense as it's no different
           | to installing any type of central heating system.
           | 
           | As a retrofit option an air to air system would seem
           | attractive as the installation is much simpler. Our homes
           | tend to be smaller and there wouldn't be any HVAC ducting so
           | you would probably only have a since source of warm air with
           | an air to air system.
        
             | crote wrote:
             | I feel like installing a heat pump which cannot cool is a
             | mistake at this point.
             | 
             | Heat waves are already getting more intense and more
             | frequent. While AC was a luxury a decade or two ago, it is
             | rapidly becoming a necessity.
             | 
             | It is absolutely bizarre seeing houses designed like -20C
             | winters are still a common thing, while completely ignoring
             | summer heat.
        
             | Nextgrid wrote:
             | > With new builds air to water makes sense as it's no
             | different to installing any type of central heating system.
             | 
             | But it's the same level of effort than installing indoor
             | A/C units, so why not install those instead? Plus
             | refrigerant pipes can potentially be thinner depending on
             | the max "load" of that room.
        
               | falcolas wrote:
               | Because it can also heat a house at the same energy
               | efficiency, that is, better than electrical resistance or
               | gas heating.
        
               | sokoloff wrote:
               | In a heating-dominated climate, there may well be no air
               | conditioning installed. In a hydronic-only heating
               | building (underfloor and/or baseboard/radiators), there
               | can be less work to run heating pipes only (much faster,
               | cheaper, and more forgiving than running refrigerant
               | lineset and managing the condensation drain line).
               | 
               | For heat-only, I find hydronic to be nearly ideal: low
               | noise, no dust, and high comfort (no air
               | movement/drafts).
        
           | Ekaros wrote:
           | There is also question what is the water in picture. Heat
           | pump efficiency decreases when the temperature delta
           | increases. As such it really does depend is the heating done
           | via radiators or underfloor. As later can be used with
           | significantly lower temperature. Where as specially during
           | cold times radiators need rather hot water. In such cases
           | air-to-air might actually be more efficient.
        
           | hanche wrote:
           | Not an expert, but the much higher heat capacity (and heat
           | conductivity) of water compared to air is likely one reason.
           | But also, when it's really cold outside, an air to air heat
           | pump is much less efficient. If you have access to liquid
           | water, that is of course much warmer than outside air.
        
         | kevincox wrote:
         | > However this drops off as the outside temperature drops and
         | you push up the heating demanded.
         | 
         | With Irish climate and modern heat pumps this should be a non-
         | issue. Maybe in the colder areas a day or two in the average
         | year. Newer heat pumps can maintain very good efficiency under
         | 0degC.
        
           | tzs wrote:
           | > Newer heat pumps can maintain very good efficiency under
           | 0degC
           | 
           | Well under 0, in fact. The Mitsubishi ones are still at 200%
           | at -18 (0), down from 300% at 0 (32). They don't fall to 100%
           | until around -26 (-15). Fujitsu is similar.
           | 
           | Their capacity also falls at lower temperatures going from
           | 100% at -5 (23) to 76% at -25 (-13) so you might need to go
           | with a bigger system in some areas.
        
         | dv_dt wrote:
         | Seems odd not to encourage both as PV solar and a heat pump go
         | pretty well together. Is it more of a question of legislative
         | particulars vs technology?
        
           | knolan wrote:
           | It's down to cost. The energy rating is subdivided into
           | thirds. An A1 home would have both but an A2 or an A3 will
           | have just one. As long as it's any type of A rated it's
           | acceptable.
        
       | intrasight wrote:
       | I have made a successful offer on a house. When I had initially
       | walked through with realtor, I looked at the furnace and thought
       | something was amiss. Then during inspection, the inspector told
       | me that it was a heat pump, and it's only about two years old. My
       | first reaction was "on no - electric heat". But later I Googled
       | and found a page that has a cost calculator.
       | 
       | https://www.columbiagaspa.com/services/add-or-convert-to-gas...
       | 
       | It looks like it will be ~20% less to have a heat pump. Also
       | natural gas prices are forecast to continue up and make the heat
       | pump even more cost effective.
       | 
       | I still do wish there was gas service to the house. But I doubt
       | that I want it enough to pay for the installation.
        
         | ZeroGravitas wrote:
         | If the house has no gas connection at all then, depending on
         | local regulations, they may have been able to insulate to a
         | higher standard, and so you save even more money.
         | 
         | Because of combustion you need extra ventilation designed in.
         | 
         | That and the connection cost make it an easy choice for newly
         | built homes.
        
           | intrasight wrote:
           | The house was built in 1975. There's about 3 inches of
           | fiberglass batting in attic. One of the first things I'll do
           | after closing is to blow in 12+" of insulation.
        
             | pmlnr wrote:
             | Blow what? Don't do foam. It'll massacre the timber. If you
             | want something else, look at hempcrete, wool, foam glass
             | aggregate.
        
           | jws wrote:
           | In the US at least, high efficiency home gas furnaces bring
           | in their own combustion air from the outside so they don't
           | bring drafts into the house. They also don't have flues
           | throughly the roof. The exhaust gas is cool enough that it
           | goes out wherever is convenient through a PVC pipe parallel
           | to the intake pipes.
        
           | nkurz wrote:
           | > depending on local regulations, they may have been able to
           | insulate to a higher standard
           | 
           | Are you implying that some places have _maximum_ amounts of
           | insulation that are allowed for new construction? This seems
           | backwards.
        
             | ZeroGravitas wrote:
             | No, but they'll insist on minimum ventilation if you burn
             | stuff, which usually involves letting heated/cooled air out
             | with the toxins.
        
               | Scoundreller wrote:
               | Drove me bonkers that "over-the-range" microwaves are
               | unavailable in europe. Probably because they assume
               | everyone uses gas and would set them on fire, or that
               | it's impossible for them to vent fast enough.
        
             | xeromal wrote:
             | If they're too airtight, it's a safety issue if you have a
             | gas system.
        
             | ceejayoz wrote:
             | Builders and homeowners tend to functionally enforce the
             | minimum _as_ the maximum.
        
       | 2Gkashmiri wrote:
       | I am in the market for a heat pump.
       | 
       | A bit of back story. When we built our home in 2003, we had
       | plumbing for central heating put in with the idea that we would
       | get a boiler, a lot of kerosene and get heating. Sadly, but the
       | time the home was finished, kerosene started to reach
       | unreasonable levels which continues to this day. Never had any
       | boiler or even the radiators put in.
       | 
       | Over the past year or so , I found how people are using heatpumps
       | to heat the water at 40-55degC, that water can be used to warm
       | the house.
       | 
       | Tried to talk to some installers including the one who set up the
       | plumbing, they are not convinced.
       | 
       | One said " the life of a heat pump is like 10 years. If you buy
       | one, you will use it only for 10 seasons and the cost of that is
       | quite a lot so the math does not check out.
       | 
       | To note, we don't have at whole house heating right now.
       | 
       | Tried to find YouTube but there isn't a lot of material on using
       | heat pumps with central heating.
        
         | ricardobayes wrote:
         | 40 to 55C is good for underfloor heating. Which in most cases
         | unfortunately is way too costly to install, in an existing
         | structure as you'd need to rip out all your floors and the
         | ground beneath it, to allow for 8 cm of tubing in a cement
         | structure.
        
         | jaclaz wrote:
         | There are units which exchange heat with water, but typically
         | they won't reach more than 40-45 Cdeg, maybe 50, I doubt 55, so
         | radiators heating won't work, you need fan-coils or - better -
         | under floor heating.
         | 
         | Additionally (it depends) usually pipes used in traditional
         | radiator heating system are smaller in section (when compared
         | to those used in fan-coil heating/refreshing) so your existing
         | pipes may be too small to allow the system to work efficiently.
         | 
         | Personally I am not impressed by them, if not in direct small
         | (split) systems, the exchange to water seems like losing a lot
         | of energy.
         | 
         | But the good thing is that they allow, in reverse, to cool the
         | house in the warm months (though not comparable to a
         | traditional A/C system).
         | 
         | The 10 years duration sounds like what you can expect (to be
         | compared to a traditional burner that would cost less than half
         | a heat pump and is more in the 20+ years duration).
         | 
         | There is also the issue that (at least in my experience) they
         | are "slow" when compared to a gas/kerosene/oil burner, so you
         | need to keep the house somewhat heated at all times as it takes
         | more time to raise temperature[1].
         | 
         | [1] there is a lot of debate around whether it is more
         | efficient (with traditional fuel burners) to switch heating off
         | when you are not in the house (potentially letting the
         | temperature go down to - say - 8-10 Cdeg) and boost to the
         | wanted temperature when you are in or keep at all times the
         | house warm (at - say - 13-15 Cdeg) and only increase the
         | temperature to 18-20 Cdeg when you are in
        
           | te0006 wrote:
           | >There are units which exchange heat with water, but
           | typically they won't reach more than 40-45 Cdeg, maybe 50, I
           | doubt 55, so radiators
           | 
           | That's what two heating "experts" told me in Spring 2021 when
           | my gas furnace for central heating needed to be replaced and
           | I asked them wether it would be possible to just replace it
           | with an electric heat pump. "Impossible", they said, your
           | house is not insulated strongly enough and you don't have
           | floor heating, so the outgoing temp will not suffice". It's
           | not true. There are many heat pumps on the market now, and
           | have been since 2020, which manage to deliver 55degC without
           | problem, amongst them, self-contained "monobloc" devices[1] -
           | a box mounted at the outside of the house, which only needs
           | cables and two pipes for connecting to the central heating
           | circulation. With COP values of 3-4 depending on outside temp
           | and outgoing heating water temp. Look at your actual outgoing
           | temp settings (or "heating curve") on the gas furnace. If you
           | never need >55degC, or only need such a temperature on three
           | extremely cold days each year, then a heat pump might be a
           | good idea. Except you can't buy them right now, at least in
           | parts of Europe, for reasons that need not be repeated here.
           | 
           | [1] e.g. this one, which even delivers 60degC:
           | https://www.daikin.eu/en_us/product-group/air-to-water-
           | heat-...
        
           | 2Gkashmiri wrote:
           | what if we use, as you said, FCUs instead of a traditional
           | radiator?
           | 
           | i understand other commenters are talking about individual
           | air conditioning but that increases the electrical load
           | exponentially because you have multiple units running at the
           | same time... think of the poor wires.
           | 
           | has anyone been crazy enough to preheat the heatpump from
           | solar ? would that even work?
        
             | jaclaz wrote:
             | As said, very likely the pipes you have (dimensioned for
             | radiators) are too small for fan-coils.
             | 
             | There is not much issue with several units, the problem was
             | with electric motors starting (old motors can have
             | something like 5 times normal current peaks when starting)
             | modern motors all have electronics that smooth them down.
             | 
             | You mean:
             | 
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar-assisted_heat_pump
        
               | 2Gkashmiri wrote:
               | not these... they aren't available in india :-(
               | 
               | i mean air to water source heat pump that would get
               | inputs from a standalone solar water heater.....
               | 
               | solar water heater>heat pump>??? profit
               | 
               | https://www.racold.com/heat-pump-water-heaters/domestic
               | 
               | 150Litre one basic model costs INR 122,000 or US $ 1452.
               | 
               | https://www.racold.com/solar-water-heaters/alpha-pro the
               | basic 100 Litre one costs inr 24000 or us$ 285. this is
               | retail prices while government subsidy is like in 10,000
               | or US$119.
               | 
               | you can see the idea,
        
               | ZeroGravitas wrote:
               | Mixergy does a water tank that can accept input from
               | multiple heat sources including solar thermal and solar
               | PV and heat pumps.
               | 
               | Not sure how widely available it is though.
               | 
               | https://www.mixergy.co.uk/products/solar-tank/
        
         | rjsw wrote:
         | There is a big push in Europe to replace gas central heating
         | boilers with heat pumps, from before there were any problems
         | with the supply of gas, I think the information available on
         | them will improve quite quickly.
         | 
         | My brother has installed one for his house but I have not done
         | yet.
        
           | BonoboIO wrote:
           | Heatpumps at least in Austria are the preferred heating
           | method for like 10 years if you build new or renovate. They
           | just work and it's interesting to see that they are the new
           | sh*t in the US.
        
             | kleiba wrote:
             | That's right. My sister's family built their house 11 years
             | ago in Germany, and they have a heat pump too. I think it's
             | pretty standard for new residential builds.
        
             | mardifoufs wrote:
             | They aren't at all new in the US though? It just depends on
             | the location, and they are very common in some areas
        
         | sokoloff wrote:
         | I like HeatGeek and once you start watching them, you'll get
         | plenty of other recommendations.
         | 
         | Here's a reasonable get started video of his:
         | https://youtu.be/D8pvXDk_KAA
         | 
         | I'd expect to get 15-20 years from a well-installed air-source
         | heat pump. That's not as long as an old, atmospheric boiler,
         | but isn't that much shorter than a modern modcon boiler in
         | terms of what I'd expect.
         | 
         | Even if you got only 10 seasons, I think it would pencil out in
         | most climates/electric prices, provided it can make all your
         | heating load. (It was too questionable for my house, so I've
         | had to pass for now, but will be plumbing the system to allow
         | an easy addition of air-to-water to the primary loop.) Given
         | that you're 18 years without central heat, I'd expect you could
         | get away with just a heat pump.
        
         | Nextgrid wrote:
         | > I found how people are using heatpumps to heat the water at
         | 40-55degC, that water can be used to warm the house.
         | 
         | This would only work for heating though and would have a
         | significant latency (you have lots of thermal inertia in the
         | system). Why not go with standard reversible A/C units which
         | not only would also provide cooling capability but process the
         | air locally so you don't have to wait for pipes/radiators to
         | warm up before actually getting heat?
        
           | ricardobayes wrote:
           | My research lead me to exactly the same conclusion. Heat
           | pumps cost the earth if you call them heat pumps, but once
           | you call them an inverter split A/C they magically cost an
           | order of magnitude less (even though it's the exact same
           | tech).
        
             | ZeroGravitas wrote:
             | You do get slightly different tech when aimed at air-to-air
             | and air-to-water needs, and different target temps and
             | there's newer generations of the same tech that rivals
             | ground source heat pumps.
             | 
             | So its not just a rip off, though there's probably a fair
             | bit of that too as demand has risen recently.
        
       | ctur wrote:
       | It feels obligatory to reference Technology Connection in a
       | thread about heat pumps. TC is a super fun YouTube channel that
       | digs j to everyday technology and has had a number of episodes on
       | heat pumps and modern thermodynamic management challenges and
       | technologies.
       | 
       | https://youtu.be/7J52mDjZzto
        
         | bcjordan wrote:
         | Came here to post this :D
         | 
         | The TC channel is definitely a hacker's eye view in to all the
         | technologies that we take for granted every day. Tons of
         | fascinating tech history covered, too.
         | 
         | Other fun ones:
         | 
         | - a defense of the simple drip coffee maker
         | https://youtu.be/Sp9H0MO-qS8
         | 
         | - why do the turn signals not sync up when you're at a stop
         | light? https://youtu.be/2z5A-COlDPk
         | 
         | - how humidifiers work and ehy the simple swamp cooler style
         | are pretty ideal https://youtu.be/oHeehYYgl28
         | 
         | - why dishwasher detergent packs are stupid (use powder/liquid)
         | and why you should use the pre-wash slot and not bother pre
         | rinsing your plates https://youtu.be/_rBO8neWw04
         | 
         | - why do light switches click? https://youtu.be/jrMiqEkSk48
        
           | pottertheotter wrote:
           | I take his stuff with a grain of salt because I found the
           | dishwasher detergent recommendation to be a bad idea.
           | 
           | A while before the TC video came out, I had an appliance
           | repair person working on my fridge and asked him what he
           | thought the best detergent was and he said use powdered, not
           | the packs. So we switched to that.
           | 
           | Not long after our dishes were never getting cleaned. I
           | thought it was a problem with the dishwasher so I took apart
           | the filter, cleaned all the sprayers, etc. but nothing
           | worked. Was thinking we needed a new dishwasher until one day
           | we ran out of powdered detergent but had a couple packs left
           | over so my wife used one.
           | 
           | Bingo! Our dishes came out PERFECT. We haven't had a single
           | problem since.
        
             | BoiledCabbage wrote:
             | Did you change brands or types when you switched to powder?
        
               | pottertheotter wrote:
               | I used Cascade Platinum packs before and after trying
               | powder. When using powder I primarily used Cascade
               | Complete (there was a short time early in the pandemic
               | when I had to grab whatever was available on the shelf).
        
             | cromka wrote:
             | Quite the contrary for me. I suppose your powder detergent
             | might be of lower quality than the packs one, or is not as
             | concentrated and you need to use more of it?
        
               | pottertheotter wrote:
               | I used Cascade Complete powder and Cascade Platinum
               | packs.
        
             | lupire wrote:
             | When you used powder, did you add detergent to the prewash
             | cycle?
             | 
             | TC did make an apology video after the first detergent
             | video.
        
               | pottertheotter wrote:
               | I usually put some in the prewash area.
        
             | kortex wrote:
             | What kind of powder are you using? Some really cheap
             | powders are basically just sodium carbonate and silicate,
             | with some enzymes, and no actual detergents. These won't
             | work well if your load is "too clean", as it needs some
             | grease to saponify in order to generate detergent.
             | 
             | The medium/high quality stuff contains more/better
             | detergents, water conditioners, and sometimes rinse aids.
             | The packs are just powder formulations pressed into a
             | pellet.
        
               | pottertheotter wrote:
               | I mostly used Cascade Complete powder (there was a point
               | early in the pandemic when I had to grab whatever was on
               | the shelf) and use Cascade Platinum packs.
               | 
               | A couple months back we ran out of packs and had some
               | powder leftover, so I ran a load with the powder. I ended
               | up having to run the load again once we got the packs.
        
             | smhg wrote:
             | I tried the 'add detergent to the pre-wash-cycle' part.
             | While it seems to make sense, it also caused a lot more
             | rust spots on cutlery. The detergent is just too aggressive
             | that way.
        
           | oezi wrote:
           | > - why dishwasher detergent packs are stupid (use
           | powder/liquid)
           | 
           | ? I thought that powder and liquid for dishwashers have come
           | out worse on any consumer reports test (at least here in
           | Germany).
        
             | WastingMyTime89 wrote:
             | Most dishwashers are designed to do a pre-wash, change the
             | water, then do a wash. Pre-wash requires detergent to work
             | optimally, ideally one specifically designed for pre-
             | washing. Even dishwashers which have no pre-wash detergent
             | dispenser will typically tell you to add some detergent
             | directly on the door in the instruction manual. Most packs
             | are suboptimal for that. Technically they should be used in
             | addition to pre-wash detergent but that kind of defeats the
             | point of using a pack.
        
               | Scoundreller wrote:
               | Best advice I learned from that channel was to run the
               | sink faucet until it's hot. Then run the dishwasher so it
               | starts its cycle with actually hot water.
        
               | oezi wrote:
               | A good dishwasher (based on testing) will never need some
               | manual tinkering like this.
        
               | blacksmith_tb wrote:
               | Hmm, dishwashers I have had (including my current one)
               | have a large heating element in the bottom, I would have
               | thought that could heat the relatively small volume of
               | water in there pretty quickly?
        
               | zo1 wrote:
               | Most (actually all) dishwashers that I've encountered are
               | designed to not get hot water coming in. Where I live a
               | high-pressure hot-water outlet is not the norm at all.
               | And yet, we don't have a catastrophic country-wide
               | problem with dirty dishes. I'd argue that something else
               | it at play.
        
               | Scoundreller wrote:
               | Not on this continent. But obviously the advice can be
               | ignored if your dishwasher isn't connected to hot water.
               | 
               | The reason for your setup is probably 240V electricity
               | that is affordable enough to resort to resistive heating.
        
               | oezi wrote:
               | Packs should be put in the dispenser so they don't act
               | during prewash.
        
             | mschild wrote:
             | Detergent packs in the US seem to be mostly gel packs. In
             | Germany, most tabs are simply hard pressed powder. Gel
             | packs did fail in their cleaning function and the
             | recommendation generally goes for either tabs or powder,
             | where powder can save you money because you set the dosage
             | according to how full your dishwasher is.
        
               | lupire wrote:
               | Fine tuning powder per wash sounds like overoptimization.
               | Just useing powder instead of tabs will save most of the
               | money.
        
               | Scoundreller wrote:
               | But I _save_ time by pouring in less when less is needed.
        
               | oezi wrote:
               | Prepackaged tabs with self-disolving packaging is
               | actually the cheapest if you assign a non-zero amount of
               | money to your own time.
        
               | kortex wrote:
               | How much extra time does it take to dump out some powder?
               | I don't actually measure precisely and just eyeball it.
               | The advantage is I can dump some extra in the bay to act
               | as pre-wash. The cost is 4-10x more for the self-
               | dissolving packs.
        
               | sokoloff wrote:
               | I looked on Amazon at Cascade powder ($0.22/oz in large
               | packages) and the same name tablets ($0.30/tablet in
               | large packages).
               | 
               | A load with powder is typically 0.75 oz. ($0.165/load) or
               | about 55% the cost, not 10-25% the cost.
               | 
               | Being able to dump in extra for pre-wash is an advantage
               | to powder for sure.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | stormdennis wrote:
       | The focus today is also on insulation ie preventing heat loss.
       | That means making houses less draughty. But draughty houses are
       | also healthy houses. More fresh air and less mould. I think it
       | would be better if people accepted that in Winter it's going to
       | be colder indoors so wear thermal underwear etc.
        
         | ClumsyPilot wrote:
         | Its called heat recovery ventillation, its the cheapest and
         | most cost efficient improvement you can make to your life,
         | house and energy bill.
         | 
         | You will have fresh air, control humidity and use 95% of the
         | heat in your house air to heat incoming air from outside. It
         | solves problems with mould and humidty. You can seal your house
         | from the elments
         | 
         | A 'box' that does everything costs just 1 grand, just install
         | ducting and you are done.
        
           | Jill_the_Pill wrote:
           | Do you know: is this tech useful for hot water
           | radiator/boiler systems or is it just for air?
        
             | pottertheotter wrote:
             | In Europe where most homes only have radiant
             | heating/cooling, new homes have a separate fresh air
             | system, which would include an ERV.
        
         | ctroein89 wrote:
         | Drafty houses are not healthy houses: timber needs to be able
         | to dry out to stay rot-and mold-free, but draftiness is
         | associated with weakened immune systems and therefore poorer
         | health. The draftiness rule only holds for older houses
         | constructed before insulation, where the draftiness is needed
         | to counteract the cool, stone/brick basement collecting
         | moisture. A modern house design for insulation should be tight
         | and mechanically ventilated, both for the maintenance of the
         | structure and for human health.
        
         | tialaramex wrote:
         | It is possible to considerably improve the heat insulation of a
         | building while still allowing turnover of fresh air. We don't
         | specifically want to throw away the heat, we just want to
         | change the air, and you can arrange to do that. The laws of
         | thermodynamics forbid us from arranging to keep all the hotter
         | molecules and lose the cool ones, but they allow us to insist
         | on a roughly fair swap, hot air going out gets cooler, cold air
         | coming in gets warmer.
         | 
         | This will be more expensive than just sealing everything up and
         | hoping, but that's the sort of reason why you want somebody
         | figuring out how to do it properly and only subsidising work
         | that we know insulates homes without destroying ventilation so
         | that they're horrible to live in. Modern homes here have _much_
         | better heat insulation than when I was a kid, yet there isn 't
         | the damp problem I saw in cheaply retro-fitted rental places
         | where I lived.
        
         | legulere wrote:
         | Making houses less draughty is just one point (convective heat
         | transfer) another point is making walls conduct heat less to
         | reduce conductive heat transfer.
         | 
         | Uninsulated houses often has higher risk to mold because of
         | cold walls. Warmer air has a higher capacity to carry water as
         | humidity. When it hits cold walls the air cools down and the
         | water condensates leading to mold.
        
       | contravariant wrote:
       | Do heat pumps still have a high enough efficiency at temperatures
       | of over 150 degrees to justify the investment? I suppose the
       | theoretical efficiency is still around 300% but I'm not sure how
       | close heat pumps can get to the theoretical limits.
        
         | adgjlsfhk1 wrote:
         | they should. in general, the main time they drop significantly
         | below theoretical efficiency is when the cold end gets iced up
         | which wouldn't be a problem here.
        
         | sokoloff wrote:
         | Page 79 has a bit of info on COP (efficiency) vs LLT (leaving
         | liquid temp).
         | 
         | With intelligent management of LLT, your install will spend a
         | lot of the year at 120degF or lower, where the efficiency is
         | fairly high. If you end up with 2-3 days of COP under 2.0,
         | that's not catastrophic if you spend 40-50x as much of the
         | season at COP of 3.5+.
         | 
         | You can probably find the outdoor temperature histogram for
         | your area and figure out what your overall heating profile
         | looks like.
         | 
         | But, if you need 150degF water a lot, AWHPs are probably not a
         | good fit.
        
           | contravariant wrote:
           | Oh were the temperatures mentioned in Fahrenheit? Then that
           | makes things a bit easier, I thought they needed 150degC.
        
             | nkurz wrote:
             | No, the temperatures are in Celsius. From the white paper
             | linked from the main article: "This paper makes a
             | distinction between low temperature (<200degC) and high
             | temperature (>200degC) process heat".
             | https://www.sintef.no/globalassets/sintef-
             | energi/industrial-...
        
             | hanche wrote:
             | Your original guess is right. I checked the original
             | Norwegian text. It says 150 grader (degrees), and that
             | surely means Celsius when used unqualified in Norwegian. So
             | we're talking high pressure superheated water here, for
             | industrial purposes.
        
               | MobiusHorizons wrote:
               | Another clue is that they call 150 deg 5 bar steam.
        
             | sokoloff wrote:
             | In that article (for industrial process heating), it could
             | be in degC.
             | 
             | For home heating, 150degC would be far too dangerous to
             | circulate.
        
           | ZeroGravitas wrote:
           | Note that the article talks about a different design of heat
           | pump, compared with the common home and industrial HVAC
           | units, for use in industry at that higher temp.
           | 
           | Especially valuable when you have some waste heat from
           | another process.
           | 
           | Probably a good fit for existing district heating systems
           | too.
        
           | csours wrote:
           | I completely missed the link to the whitepaper and thought it
           | was just a really bad article.
           | 
           | Does the pdf talk about which working fluids are used? Are
           | there any details at all about implementation?
        
         | icegreentea2 wrote:
         | One of the demo projects listed in the linked white paper is
         | aiming for >50% of theoretical efficiency in that temperature
         | range
         | 
         | > LowCapex and FUSE (TNO): Demonstration of heat pump
         | technology on an industrial scale (2 MW), producing process
         | steam at temperatures between 120degC to 150degC from waste
         | heat at 60degC to 90degC with efficiencies above 50 % of the
         | theoretical maximum.
         | 
         | Elsewhere in the white paper:
         | 
         | > Comparing these alternatives, it has been shown that high
         | temperature heat pumps, with COPs as low as 2, are competitive
         | in levelized cost of heat with biomass boilers and natural-gas
         | based boilers under consideration of a CO2 tax of 50 EUR/tonne.
         | 
         | So... definitely not slam dunk.
        
       | Waterluvian wrote:
       | In addition to a heat pump, I wish my HVAC had a filtered vent
       | from the outside and would be intelligent enough to sometimes
       | just pump in cooler or warmer air from the outside when viable.
       | 
       | I don't like having to shut off my furnace and manually manage
       | windows. But I also don't want automatic windows. I just want it
       | to be like, "you're asking for 21C and we can get there by
       | pumping in outside air rather than using an AC to transfer heat
       | from the inside air to the outside air."
        
         | Dig1t wrote:
         | You must have a well insulated house.. as soon as I turn off my
         | AC or heater my house very quickly becomes the same temperature
         | as outside..
        
           | Waterluvian wrote:
           | My house is also in a forest so the sun doesn't bake it. That
           | might be part of it.
        
           | ghaff wrote:
           | Really? I live in a mostly not very well-insulated 200 year
           | old wood construction farm house and I find that there can
           | easily be a 10 degree F delta between indoors and outdoors. I
           | have heat for the winter given northern climate but otherwise
           | mostly just do regulation by opening or closing windows.
        
             | [deleted]
        
         | dijonman2 wrote:
         | It's called an economizer and is controlled by enthalpy
         | sensors. Look into honeywell jade system, if you are handy then
         | you can DIY it. Controllers are super cheap on ebay. Just be
         | mindful of air balance.
        
         | dagmx wrote:
         | Isn't that effectively a heat recovery ventilation system?
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_recovery_ventilation?wpro...
        
         | elil17 wrote:
         | That's called an air side economizer, they're very common in
         | commercial buildings but residential units are also available.
        
         | JohnJamesRambo wrote:
         | I think the main problem would be humidity issues. The outside
         | air swings so wildly in humidity. I was growing weed outside in
         | my state and surprised to watch the humidity on the meter
         | regularly go from 21% to nearly 100% on day night cycles.
        
           | amluto wrote:
           | Look at dew point or some absolute humidity measure instead.
           | As air gets colder, the amount of water vapor it can hold
           | (the denominator in _relative_ humidity) decreases
           | dramatically.
           | 
           | Introducing cold, saturated air to your warm house will not,
           | in general, make it feel nasty and humid.
        
             | JohnJamesRambo wrote:
             | Some googling of experts shows it can be quite a concern.
             | 
             | https://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=188008
        
               | Scoundreller wrote:
               | I can only barely understand what's going on in that
               | link, but I think it really depends on target indoor
               | environment.
               | 
               | While I don't want the walls sweating, I could imagine
               | there are industrial or commercial environments where
               | moisture level matters a lot. Electronics plant: dry is
               | always bad! Want some moisture to dissipate static. A
               | library wants low, but not zero moisture. A manufacturing
               | plant wants it to be very consistent. A fruit market
               | wants its humidity high.
               | 
               | In a residential environment, it's a toss up: some stuff
               | wants to be dryer while other stuff doesn't.
        
               | amluto wrote:
               | I don't think you're likely to make the walls sweat by
               | running an economizer or, for that matter, opening a
               | window while it's cooler outside than inside. You may end
               | up with more humidity inside than you like, though,
               | depending on the weather.
               | 
               | That link seems to be discussing a situation where there
               | is too much humidity coming in relative to the amount of
               | heat the A/C needs to remove, and that hits my pet peeve
               | about air conditioning design. Air conditioners generally
               | run at a roughly constant coil temperature, which means
               | that there is no independent control over
               | dehumidification versus cooling. If you happen to be at
               | the design conditions, great. Otherwise you don't end up
               | with the humidity you want.
               | 
               | I know of one system ("dynamic humidity control" by
               | Chiltrix) that adjusts the coil temperature to control
               | humidity. As far as I know, any hydronic system can do
               | this with minimal modification, but I don't think it's
               | popular.
        
               | Scoundreller wrote:
               | I have a similar issue with thermostats in general: set
               | points without a humidity coefficient is a constant
               | battle. 26C and dry is comfortable: Stay off. 26C and
               | humid is sweltering: Power up.
               | 
               | My "smart" thermostat has a settings for this, but I seem
               | to be at its algorithm's mercy instead of specifying:
               | "50% RH or less, no change, 50-70%, -2C to the set
               | points, 70%+, -3C to the set points".
               | 
               | Let alone being able to do dehumidification only.
        
               | amluto wrote:
               | This isn't entirely a problem with your thermostat. If
               | it's 26C and humid, all your thermostat can do is to call
               | for cooling. (Maybe it can call for stage 1 or stage 2.
               | You are unlikely to have anything that can do stand-alone
               | dehumification.) So it _can't_ actually achieve a
               | comfortable and efficient target.
        
               | Scoundreller wrote:
               | Would still be more comfortable and efficient if could
               | aim for what I'd be equally happy with: 23C + humid or
               | 26C + dry
        
           | pkulak wrote:
           | That's just because the temperature swings wildly. Water
           | isn't going in and out of the air.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | mherdeg wrote:
         | Yeah it makes me really upset when the outside dew point is
         | lower than inside (often in the fall) and I've got to dig out
         | my lasko box fan and run it in the windows.
         | 
         | There are several kinds of HVAC systems for fresh air
         | ventilation and free cooling (HRV/ERV) and it was a huge bummer
         | to hear an ac expert say "your tiny house's tiny closet has no
         | space for any new toys at all"
        
           | Jill_the_Pill wrote:
           | Not to be really dumb about this (I don't have a heat pump,
           | don't know exactly how they work, but have some interest in
           | getting one) -- is it not possible to shut them off entirely
           | for the fall? Are they hard to restart or something? Is it
           | like the obnoxious car systems that always want to be giving
           | you either heat or cool and just refuse to do nothing when
           | it's nice out?
        
             | sokoloff wrote:
             | They can easily turn themself off and restart easily.
             | 
             | GP was wanting to take advantage of the more favorable
             | outside air (lower sensible and latent heat) and just do
             | filtered air exchange directly with the outside rather than
             | running the compressor.
        
         | masklinn wrote:
         | > In addition to a heat pump, I wish my HVAC had a filtered
         | vent from the outside and would be intelligent enough to
         | sometimes just pump in cooler or warmer air from the outside
         | when viable.
         | 
         | Hell a modern AC can probably do with only filtered venting,
         | with a heat exchanger which gets disabled when using external
         | air to get to the target temperature.
        
         | bilsbie wrote:
         | You should look into a whole house fan.
        
           | jotato wrote:
           | Can confirm. They are awesome
        
             | bilsbie wrote:
             | I have heard to avoid them in areas with high humidity for
             | mold reasons. But otherwise I don't see why it couldn't
             | save you a ton on cooling.
        
         | tolmasky wrote:
         | We installed something like this, but for the purpose of
         | getting fresh air into the house (instead of circling stale air
         | over and over and increasing the CO2 levels). Our setup is:
         | 
         | Fresh air / circulated air -> Perfect 16[1] -> HVAC
         | 
         | I highly recommend it. You can also get an ERV or HRV to
         | utilize heat/humidity when bringing in outside air.
         | 
         | 1. https://www.iqair.com/us/whole-house-air-purifiers
        
           | piceas wrote:
           | I think systems like this make sense.
           | 
           | I'm not yet convinced that they are worth 3k more than a pico
           | and a fan, at least as a retrofit.
        
             | pkulak wrote:
             | The beauty of a real ventilation system is the heat
             | exchanger. I'm still waiting for someone to make one that I
             | can run by feeding a tube out my window, but until then,
             | you need to spend a bit of cash on a permanent
             | installation.
        
               | WithinReason wrote:
               | I was looking for such a minified heat pump as well, no
               | luck.
        
               | Scoundreller wrote:
               | Or just, a windowshaker A/C unit that has a heat mode.
               | 
               | (That's uglier, but surprisingly difficult to find).
        
               | WithinReason wrote:
               | Exactly, but no luck. Maybe there is a technical reason.
        
               | Scoundreller wrote:
               | Dunno either. Should be no issues in flipping the whole
               | unit around. Controls/weatherproofing would be on the
               | wrong side. Put some nice indoor plants underneath it
               | because they'll now be self-watering.
        
               | rapjr9 wrote:
               | You might try buying two CPU coolers with fans and
               | connect them together via their heat sinks with the fans
               | pointing in opposite directions. Then build a housing for
               | it to match your window. That should transfer some of the
               | heat/cool from the outgoing air to the incoming air. Put
               | a filter on it to keep bugs and pollen out of the house
               | (including the outgoing fan because you might turn it off
               | sometimes. It needs at least a no-see-um size mesh
               | screen.)
        
           | amluto wrote:
           | I read that page, and that sounds like a MERV 16 filter than
           | attaches to a third party fan coil. I can't tell how it's any
           | different from, say, an Aprilaire 216 plus its (very cheap)
           | housing, along with smart home integration and a pretty logo,
           | minus the transparent pricing.
        
             | tolmasky wrote:
             | One of the differences is how hard you have to push against
             | a regular MERV 16 filter vs. this one. You can generally
             | install a Perfect 16 into an HVAC without having to adjust
             | its settings and thus how much energy is required to run
             | it. I haven't looked at the April Aire stuff in a bit, so
             | don't know if they happen to do something similar, but I
             | was looking at a number of different options for a much
             | larger building install, and you can generally price the
             | P16 without having to factor in energy price increases.
             | 
             | My main gripe with the Perfect 16 is that it doesn't do any
             | of the multi gas stuff ( https://www.iqair.com/room-air-
             | purifiers/gc-multigas ), and is more like running a
             | HealthPro ( https://www.iqair.com/air-purifiers/healthpro-
             | series ).
        
               | amluto wrote:
               | This is where less gold-plated products may be better!
               | Look at page 6 here:
               | 
               | https://leesheatingandcoolingservice.com/wp-
               | content/uploads/...
               | 
               | The 216 filter has 0.17" wc of initial pressure drop at
               | 1000 cfm as compared to 0.12" wc for its MERV 13
               | equivalent, the 213. You can just swap it in if you
               | started out with MERV 13 [0] have 0.05" wc of extra
               | pressure budget (and an existing compatible housing), and
               | you can probably save 0.05" wc by just changing your
               | filter more often. Or you can design something like this
               | into a new system, just like you would have to design a
               | Perfect 16 in.
               | 
               | [0] You must have some kind of return air filter to avoid
               | destroying your fan coil. MERV 13 is somewhat of a
               | baseline for a decent system.
        
               | amluto wrote:
               | Huh, IQ Air does have specs and prices:
               | 
               | https://www.iqair.com/us/whole-house-air-purifiers/buy
               | 
               | That's... a lot more expensive than Aprilaire for only
               | slightly better performance. Two or three Aprilaire (or
               | Lennox, etc) filters in parallel will dramatically
               | outperform the Perfect 16 and will cost much less. Of
               | course, that would require some custom sheet metal, but
               | the Perfect 16 may also need some custom sheet metal.
        
           | sd_mikey wrote:
           | Matt Risinger explains how and why he put an ERV in his house
           | in this episode of The Build Show
           | https://youtu.be/OrG7oG8Tvp8. It seems to be the thing to do
           | of late in to help with air exchanges and still meet the
           | passive house standards.
        
         | smileysteve wrote:
         | The cheap DIY is to add WiFi switches to your bathroom fans,
         | turn them on when humidity is lower outside or when the outside
         | is cooler than the inside.
        
           | fennecfoxen wrote:
           | WiFi? Eh. As an ever-so-modest upgrade to the cheap DIY, a
           | Zwave or Zigbee system might be a better choice to integrate
           | with a variety of other things (like thermostats and
           | temperature/humidity sensors.)
        
             | aequitas wrote:
             | Most WiFi switches are based on ESP chips. Meaning they are
             | trivial to install custom firmware on to extend the
             | functionality. I haven't found any affordable Zigbee or
             | Zwave switches of this kind. Meaning that all the smarts
             | need to be programmed centrally instead of putting them
             | locally on the switch itself.
        
               | speleding wrote:
               | Or use a cheap zigbee or zwave power plug to switch the
               | fan, then run the logic somewhere else. (I do this)
        
             | Nextgrid wrote:
             | Wi-Fi is easier to interface with using any computer, where
             | as those other protocols require a dongle on the computer
             | side.
        
               | pkulak wrote:
               | Sure, but once you have 20 or 30 of those things in your
               | walls, congesting up your network, you'll wish you went
               | with something that runs at 900 mhz.
        
               | benj111 wrote:
               | >20 or 30.
               | 
               | In my house. 9 X main lights. Kitchen work lights.
               | Extractor fan. Oven Hob (gas) Dishwasher Washing machine
               | Dryer. Fridge. Freezer. Food processor Kettle Toaster.
               | TV. Digi box PlayStation (2 but anyway) Extractor fan
               | Boiler Laptop Printer 5 X lamps.
               | 
               | So I managed to get to 30 things. I'm not entirely sure
               | I'd want to hook up _all_ those things to a network
               | though...
        
           | gruez wrote:
           | Presumably you're doing this to pull in air from the outside
           | using negative pressure? I heard this approach isn't optimal
           | because negative pressure means that you'll be pulling in air
           | through the various gaps/crevices in the walls, which is
           | dirty and might have contaminants like mold.
        
         | bombcar wrote:
         | There are machines that do just that. They're descended from
         | commercial units, and you have to match humidity, but they can
         | be done.
         | 
         | It's just not been worth the cost, usually.
        
       | seniorsassycat wrote:
       | Would it be feasible to create a 'heat bus' to pump heat between
       | a network of devices in a house?
       | 
       | E.g in winter allow the fridge to dump heat into the kitchen, in
       | the summer pipe it outside, or into the bathroom floors, or into
       | the water heater.
       | 
       | Install one outdoor unit in the sun or attic where it's hot and
       | another in the cooler shade...
        
         | grigri907 wrote:
         | This is pretty common in commercial buildings, though not for
         | the heat reclaim that you're describing. It's particularly
         | useful when you have simultaneous heating and cooling loads
         | that can effectively serve each other.
        
       | kkfx wrote:
       | There are two issue in heating a home with a heat-pump:
       | 
       | - one is for new homes, well insulated that do not demand much
       | energy and have a p.v. system, so they need ways to minimize all
       | costs, one way is if space is not an issue, to heat large
       | quantity of water and store them to grab heat at night. For
       | instance if you need 40kWh to heat the home for a night having
       | something able to push 1000l of water let's say from 20 to 60
       | quickly enough to run on winter Sun from p.v. means free heat for
       | the night [1];
       | 
       | - one is for those with old homes, who simply need MUCH thermal
       | energy. They do not have much choices, so they need powerful
       | heat-pumps and in that case low temp heating it's not much an
       | option, they need high temperature water.
       | 
       | This is interesting for another consideration: most "efficient"
       | electrical devices are built to consume less overall, but their
       | load profile is TERRIBLE for a p.v. inverter. Witch means that a
       | modern tumbler with a heat-pump not only costs more and last less
       | than a classic ones but if you have p.v. it means LESS self-
       | consumption. Similarly for ovens who try "pushing the heat"
       | instead of give large amount of energy: they tend to have pulse
       | loads that are terrible for a p.v. inverter. That's a thing their
       | OEMs must consider in the present and future models.
       | 
       | [1] if some are curious thermal kWh = 4.2 kJ/kg* * (initial_temp-
       | final_temp) * volume_in_liters * 1/3600 h/s witch means in the
       | above example 4.2 _(60-20)_ 1000*(1/3600) = 46.67kWh
        
         | ZeroGravitas wrote:
         | If you have a hot water store its relatively cheap to dump
         | excess electricity as heat when you have nothing better to do
         | with it. Not as magically efficient as heat pumps but possibly
         | still worth it overall abd there's already products that meet
         | this need on the market.
        
           | kkfx wrote:
           | I do that already, but just for home sanitary water (sorry,
           | do not know the name in English, water for shower etc) with
           | the secondary resistive heating of an "old" (not on sale
           | anymore) Daikin/Rotex M2O EKHHP 300l v3 but I can't do the
           | same for heating: too much water is needed.
           | 
           | Actually I'm looking to expand the system with just a set of
           | insulated tanks (found some on sale 500l/~1kWh/day of
           | dispersion at 60 inside, 5 outside) and a bigger external
           | heat pump + wood stove (for emergency) to heat the water.
           | It's just an idea because:
           | 
           | - nothing pre-built seems to exists, apparently nobody is
           | interested enough in try this way to save energy bills;
           | 
           | - it not really cheap and DIY style there are many things who
           | can break making the project more an expensive toy than an
           | effective solution.
           | 
           | IF I found something that seems good enough next spring I
           | plan to expand, but it's still a relevant and generally
           | interested issue the fact that nearly nobody talk about the
           | dichotomy between p.v.-powered device needs to maximize self-
           | consumption vs non-p.v. powered homes needs to reduce the
           | total consumed energy: with a p.v. system anything should be
           | designed to run all together at full power as much as
           | possible, so automation to power on and off things quickly
           | and things made to march at very different speed depending on
           | the available power. It's far better for instance in that
           | sense a classic resistive boiler who heat water less
           | efficiently than a heat-pump BUT with a constant load and
           | perhaps not a single resistance but few, to being able to
           | "sum or reduce" the power depending on how much you can get
           | from Sun. While if you do not have a p.v. it's far better to
           | save as much energy as possible...
           | 
           | Some patterns might be common, like running appliance at a
           | dynamic point in time, one depending on the Sun, the other
           | depending on current grid load (and so price). But many
           | others are different. A stupid example my washing machine,
           | with it's eco-mode actually consume less kWh, but consume
           | MORE from the grid because it have spike loads my p.v.
           | inverter can't satisfy quickly enough from p.v. so they goes
           | on the grid. On contrary running an "expensive" high temp
           | washing program my self-consumption is normally 99.99999%
           | 
           | Surely, so far most homes do NOT have p.v. so the biggest
           | market for any appliance is the one who do not count p.v. but
           | is not really expensive counting it. Also it's absolutely not
           | expensive ad ModBUS controls on anything who consume more
           | than 1kW. It does not really change the price. It's absurd
           | not offer such option in most appliance with a _significant_
           | overprice (let 's say 40EUR for something that to the OEM
           | cost just 1EUR).
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-09-04 23:02 UTC)