Geyser water heater heat pump.


It makes distilled water. It heats the water for your water heater (you can cut the power on it) It dehumidifys your basement. It uses less than one third the power (runs on 110). Anybody tried one yet?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The graph shows that natural gas fired hot water heating is about the same cost as this gizmo, which likely uses electricity to run a heat pump. If your basement is naturally hot it might be efficient, but if it is cool like mine, it would be expensiveto run a heat pump. I think. The whole story sounds too much like a snake oil story. Of course, YMMV.
--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Han wrote:

Yes, a dehumidifier is a snake oil machine.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

You are surely backwards if you think that. My basement dehumidifier warms my basement from 68-70, lowers humidity so tools dont rust and mold doesnt grow, all for about 4.5-5$ a month, you distiller wont do that for that cheap, run your numbers and wake up on what it does, it boils water.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
ransley wrote:

It's the same thing meat head.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Why post with an invalid email? Do you mean to say that Coleman, Carrier, Trane, Amana, GE that make HVAC Heat Pumps so heat & cool your house are all snake oil? Of course not, you are just not aware of the simple fact that the same technology will also heat you water with high efficiency. Check this website: www.energystar.gov you will understand that heat pump technology even beats solar! It beats burning fossil fuels too. Get your facts straight!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Distilled water has minerals removed, critical minerals you need. A simple quality single stage cartrige filter is better for average city water. It uses one third the power? No it just consumes a ton of power and a dehumidifier is is cheaper to run. Have you tried all those 20$ gasolene energy saving gadgets yet, the ones that all promote 5-20% gas savings, I hear if you use all twenty your car doesnt use any gas to run.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
ransley wrote:

The distilled water is just a byproduct; it don't go into the domestic water supply. You should know better than that. It IS a dehumidifier that just uses the heat to heat domestic hot water by circulating it to the hot water tank. Why don't you go to the Geyser web site.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Yes I tried one and have all my relatives converted to this technology. 1) It does not make distilled water. It condensates ambient moisture into water which is different from boiling water and condensing. The difference: you will have bacteria in the water... 2) Geyser is anything but snake oil. One must understant that it takes a lot less energy to move heat than to create heat. The Environment Protection Agency uses the number 66% (less energy required to move heat compared to creating heat with electric resistance water heater). 3) Contrary to popular myths: heat pump water heaters are 33% more efficient that solar water heating system and 150% more efficient than instant electric water heaters. This means they have the smallest carbon footprint of all and any water heating technologies on the market. 4) If you want an intelligent overview, check the comparative numbers between gas, electric and other technologies at www.geyserheatpumps.com The FAQ sheet on that website is easy to read and quite informative. 5) Cooling and Dehumidification are just free by-products of the process. I have one my garage and it is quite amazing to "see" the Geyser heat pump water heater recapture and recycle all the waste heat back into the tank from the clothes washer and dryer. 6) Payback is about 2 years in the south and 3 years in the northern climates. The Geyser is expected to last 20 years just like any other heatpump packs refrigeration units. 7) Geysers and Heat Pumps are very popular in Japan, Australia and Europe. Our cost of energy has been so inexpensive in USA that we are just waking-up. 8) We can all make eco-sense and save a lot of money in the process...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

And of course coming from a company that sells them it's a fair and unbiased comparison, right? Like the ones from the companies I constantly hear on the radio telling everyone how oil heat is clean, near zero emissions and cheaper than natural gas.

Compared to what? An ordinary natural gas water heater? That sure isn't true.

It's not a matter of waking up. It's a simple matter of what is more economical. And I'm willing to bet that for the vast majority of applications, a simple natural gas water heater will still come out ahead. One obvious major flaw in the website comparison is that it ignores the time value of money. They ignore the factor that the heat pump water heater costs $2000 and it is all paid out upfront, while a gas water heater can be had for a fraction of that, with the other $1300 invested or used to insulate the house.
Also, nothing is factored in for estimated repair costs over the claimed 20 year life. I'd venture that a heat pump based system is going to be more costly to service if anything does go wrong. Plus, with many conventional ones, many of us here could service and replace any component ourselves.

Yes, but only if you compare ALL the costs in a correct and honest evaluation. I'm not saying heat pump units don't make sense in some applications. Only that the comparison on that website is full of a lot of nonsense.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yes, but only if you compare ALL the costs in a correct and honest evaluation. I'm not saying heat pump units don't make sense in some applications. Only that the comparison on that website is full of a lot of nonsense.
*******************************************************
I have a problem with one line: "Geyser makes use of a renewable energy source - the ambient air and humidity in a garage, basement or utility room - to heat the water."
The above may be true in some locations, but in the winter, where is that heated air coming from? You heated it and paid for it, and once that heat is moved to the water thank you'll heat more of it. There is only a savings in places or seasons where heating is not being used. They also mention dehumidification. Again, limited functionality. In many homes, humidity is added during the winter months.
I also went to the cost calculator. According to them, my savings would be $70 a year, a very long payback. My guess is that I'd really be spending more since they don't take my indirect fired heater into proper consideration and it is much more efficient that conventional heaters.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It is hard to predict the price of unrenewable fossil fuels for the next 20 years, a good guess is up! Indirect fire heaters usually require toxic fumes exhaust ported outdoors. Geyser decreases temperature by only a few degrees. Assuming Geyser is installed next to the water heater in a basement. Even with unheated basements winter temperature maybe 45 to 50F. That should not be cause for concerns. A good percentage of the heat is recycled from the stand-by losses recaptured from the hot water tank ( and cloth washer and dryer too). If we did not have the sun, the temperature on earth would be around -460F or 0 entrophy. Many processes store energy. Burning firewood or gas for example releases this energy but the smallest carbon footprint and most efficient way to heat is always a heat pump (moving heat): this stand true to heat a whole house as well as heating water.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sep 7, 8:46am, snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote:

Geyser price after 30% government tax credit is $1399. Payback is compared to national average US household with average usage of 63.4 gallons per day using electric resistive heating. Gas is still more expensive than Heat Pump Water Heaters and gas has a larger carbon foot print than HPWH. Data is straight from Department of Energy (DOE) and Environment Protection Agency (EPA) and Geyser Heat Pump Water Heater numbers are the exact number filed with the federal registry. Water heaters must meet Gas Appliance Manufacturers Association testing requirements as well, it is certainly untrue and unfair to say that this is self- serving. The comparative table is as realistic and scientific as can be. It is apple to apple, in today's dollars no speculation. Units that need replacement at 8 years and 13 years have been factored in. Repairs are not included as it is assumed that units are normally maintained and will meet life expectancy. For example: oil burners break down earlier that is why they are rated at 8 years not 20. HPWH technlolgy is not new, it is a refrigeration technology that has been around for 40 years.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It is not in any way a correct analysis to completely ignore the time value of money. If I have to spend $1000 extra upfront for a capital investment, that money could instead be invested over the 20 year useful lifespan. If you have to borrow the money, the picture looks even worse. This is basic business case analysis and it is lacking in this analysis as well as in many other bogus analysis to jusftify whatever someone is pitching.
Another prime example is solar electricity. A typical home system can cost $55k. Yet, the companies selling this, while crowing about eliminating electric bills, never factor in that you are shelling out a large sum of money upfront. For the solar system, many would finance the purchase and if you factored that in, the economics change drastically. Even at 5%, the interest would be $166 per month initially, which would go a long way to paying a conventional electric bill.
And while for the individual the tax benefits are a plus, at least in the case of solar, the fact that tax subsidies are necessary just goes to show that some technologies like solar just are NOT economically viable. It's nice that a few homes can get solar which is being financed by the rest of us. Here in NJ they tacked on a surcharge to everyone's electric bill, including the poor, to give hefty rebates to the few rich folks buying solar systems. That works for a tiny percentage. But for it to have any real impact on electric supply, a huge amount of money would have to come from somewhere to finance it and that money just isn't there.
With a simple natural gas water heater, I can fix it myself. Of if it goes bad, I can go down to HD and buy a new one for $400. With heat pumps of any kind, many of us have seen repair bills close to or more than that.

With a simple natural gas water heater, I can fix it myself. Of if it goes bad, I can go down to HD and buy a new one for $400. With heat pumps of any kind, many of us have seen repair bills close to or more than that.

I suppose that 8 year rating has nothing to do with the fact that they have a vested interest in pushing heat pump systems? Good grief.
HPWH

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
It is not in any way a correct analysis to completely ignore the time value of money. If I have to spend $1000 extra upfront for a capital investment, that money could instead be invested over the 20 year useful lifespan. If you have to borrow the money, the picture looks even worse. This is basic business case analysis and it is lacking in this analysis as well as in many other bogus analysis to jusftify whatever someone is pitching.
*********************************************************************************
You do have to do some analysis as some savings are hard to justify. My heating boiler was 30 years old and getting ready for replacement. Fortunately, I held off until this past January.
Cost of equipment and installation $7400 Savings from greater efficiency so far is 32% or 250 gallons of oil per year. At 2.25 = $562 per year. The raw payback is about 13 years. Not much justification to replace something still working.
The fact was, I'd be needing a heater replacement soon, payback or not. So, I started to investigate.
State offers 10 year financing at 0% interest. Payment of $62 a month or $744 a year. Out of pocket after fuel savings of $182 a year. Throw in the $500 state rebate (check received in June) and the $1500 tax credit next year, my total cost is $5400. That brings my payback down to about 9.6 years.
I almost pulled the trigger last year and I'd have missed the tax credit. I could have bought a less efficient unit and saved some money up front, the I'd not qualify for the rebate or the credit. They are sort of a wash for the difference, but the fuel savings is great and if I'm still here 10 years from now, I'm 32% ahead in heating costs. The savings is based on actual savings for the first quarter of the year, but I expect over the summer I'm saving even more on hot water. The old system was great for making lots of hot water, but the damned boiler kicked on many times during the day to maintain temperature. The new system will not go on at all during the day until someone takes a shower.
Nine months later, I'd make the same decision and stick with the System 2000 boiler. I still have about a half tank of oil from February. The old boiler would have needed the tank filled in April and again next month.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

With NASA satellite photographs showing the irreversible melting of the glaciers of the Artic and the prediction of a complete polar cap meltdown in the next 10- 20 years. For the first time in the history of man, methane gaz is released in giga quantities from the thawing permafrost. With all the scientific data surrounding us and the governments of the world trying to reverse the accelerated warming of our planet, it is very painfull to read that some of us, just like cavemen, are happy to burn bunker oil & gas to heat water and still think they save money.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Did someone just wake you up? This thread was from a month ago. There sure must be a lot of us cavemen around. Like Ed, I do a cost and practicality analysis of the available alternatives. As do builders. That's why you see nat gas and oil widely used today to heat water. We're not about to spend 2X for a green solution just because it make you happy. BTW, the heat pump solution discussed here uses electricity, most of which comes from coal. So, I guess it's OK to burn coal, transmit the energy for hundreds of miles with the losses that go with it.
So, go hug Al Gore while he boards his private jet as he flies off to another conference to talk to meat heads like you.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sep 9, 8:34am, snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote:

This statement is false: > I suppose that 8 year rating has nothing to do with the fact that they

publisher of this statement is illinformed and should have read the data from US. Department of Energy: "Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy" before blogging.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The link provided in this discussion is to a manufacturer of heat pump water heaters, not the DOE. The table is one they put together not the DOE. Otherwise, it's pretty strange that their company is the only one listed by name in the table. In other words, it's a compilation of data of their chosing without a link back to the actual source. They don't even say it's DOE data, just "Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy 2008" If you did that on a term paper you'd get called out for not citing references correctly.
So, unless you expect me to go back and check exactly what data this company used, how it was pulled, etc, I stand by my statement. For starters, I'd also like to see where the DOE said that this particular manufacturer's unit has a life expectancy of 20 years, which is what is in the table.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It 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.