Electric furnace?
Only $600
Good idea?
Baltimore.
Not for me.
Electric furnace?
Only $600
Good idea?
Baltimore.
Not for me.
An electric furnace is 100% efficient.
A typical natural gas furnace is only 98% efficient.
I know a guy who moved into a home with an electric furnace. For one month he got almost a $700 electric bill. He bought a wood stove and a propane furnace the following month (rural area so no nat. gas).
But in MOST places, 1 therm of heat from a 100% efficient electric furnace costs about twice what 1 therm of heat from propane, and 3 times from Natural Gas. Here in Ontario it would only make sense as a backup for a good ground source heat pump for an install where natural gas is not available.
bad idea because electric costs way more per BTU than say gas
I have bumped into people who converted from natural gas water heaters to electric to save money because electric is 100% efficent.
after a couple electric bills they all went back to natural gas
If you look at the big picture, the electric is not 100%. They have to make the power from something. Then loose a lot getting it to the house. Therefor more cost.
A lot of vertical loops (up to 200 feet), and some horizontal loops about 6 or 8 feet down.. Also some "rejection well" recirculating systems but they are less common
Friends in Delaware have thermal heating and cooling. The house was built with ?? heat and electric AC, but later somehow had thermal put in. Makes for an interesting basement.
They live about 50 feet up from the water, on the water, some inlet of an inlet, maybe of a river. There's a lot of shoreline in Delaware. I don't know how deep they had to drill for the thermal.
The point of analysis is typically at the meter, ie what you're paying for. If you go into what it takes to produce it, then the same kind of further analysis could be done with any fuel, eg propane, nat gas. All that matters to the consumer is what they are paying for it and how much useful heat can be extracted from it. And in that analysis, resistance electric heat is almost 100% efficient. There is a tiny insignificant amount potentially lost to waste heat in some of the wiring, where it doesn't contribute to the heating of the building.
There is a lot of heat loss from wires feeding homes and from the transformers. A big load such as anything heating with electric makes those wires and transformers warm if not hot. Several years ago, I witnessed a power outage caused by too many electric food cookers connected to the same transformer. The women in town all brought their electric cookers to the same building to provide a community meal. The pole transformer was actually smoking before it blew. When the electric company arrived, the guy went up on the pole and said it was so how that he could not remove it until it cooled down, so they had to wait hours to get the power back.
Electric heating is probably the least efficient if you look at the overall picture, from the generating source to the end use at home or a business building. Aftyer all, you're converting heat from burning fuel to electric, sending it for miles thru wires and transformers, then turning it back into heat.
And you think oil and natural gas come out of the ground by themselves, refine themselves, and transport them to your home?????
HaHaHa!!!!
The "100% efficient" is measured from the point where it leaves the meter and becomes "yours" - just like the efficiency of propane, natural gas, oil, or gasoline is measured from the time it becomes "yours"
Wood is the only fuel that is more than 100% efficient if burned properly - it heats twice. Once while you are cutting and splitting it, and once when you burn it.
Except for hydroelectric, wind power, solar, geothermal, wave power, etc.
Electric costs more in many parts of the country because they have to burn fossil fuels to create it. Here in the Pacific northwest electricity is relatively cheap, and most homes have electric heat of some type (furnace, baseboard, room wall heaters, electric radiant, or heat pumps).
Electric also offers flexibility you can't get from other heat sources. There are numerous ways to generate electricity. For example, we get most of our power from a combination of hydroelectric, wind power, and some natural gas generators.
Anthony Watson
Yep, electric heat is way more expensive
it would only make sense in very moderate climates and gas would be not available
One thing wind power is NOT is "cheap".
A heat pump is 500% efficient, right?
With a modern heat pump, under ideal conditions, you might get 5X, but overall, it's a lot less. Which is why you don't see them used much in cold climates compared to other choices. If they were 5X most of the time, you'd more than make up for the cost difference of electric vs other fuels.
No, but it is cost competetive with fossil fuels.
The devil is always in the details. It would be interesting to see what costs are factored in to this "leveling". For all we know, they could be factoring in some alleged cost to society from fossil fuels, future estimates of carbon taxes, etc. And I'll almost guarantee they are comparing a state of the art conventional plant, that has to meet the most stringent EPA standards, not the installed base. Still, even if it's half true, it's good news.
Per micky:
One thing I would consider is backup strategy when the power goes out.
It is always good to have a back up when the power goes out , especially if in an area of the country that drops below 60 deg F. or so.
Small generators such as a common 5 KW will not do much to power electric heat or a heat pump. They will run the blowers for a gas type of heat.
I have a heatpump and a wood stove in the basement that I seldom use except if the power goes off. My generator will not power the heat pump, but will power the well pump and if I cut off most everything else, the water heater. Heat the water, cut off the water heater and take a quick shower.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.