I'm thinking of installing a heat pump for my 15x30 pool.
I'm told that the correct unit for my needs (an Aquacal TropiCal) puts out
112,000 BTUs (40 amps/5.8 KW). I'm thinking that a larger unit that puts o ut 141,000 BTUs (50 amps/6.4KW), would heat the pool quicker and require le ss time on, thus use, in theory, less electricity - but it's about $500 mor e expensive than the small unit. We'll probably only use the pool on the w eekends. Not sure how long it will take to break even on this with running it for only a couple days per week.
Anybody have any thoughts or opinions about this? Is my thinking skewed? Is it worth the extra cost?
112,000 BTUs (40 amps/5.8 KW). I'm thinking that a larger unit that puts out
141,000 BTUs (50 amps/6.4KW), would heat the pool quicker and require less time on, thus use, in theory, less electricity - but it's about $500 more expensive than the small unit. We'll probably only use the pool on the weekends. Not sure how long it will take to break even on this with running it for only a couple days per week.
t 112,000 BTUs (40 amps/5.8 KW). I'm thinking that a larger unit that pu ts out 141,000 BTUs (50 amps/6.4KW), would heat the pool quicker and requir e less time on, thus use, in theory, less electricity - but it's about $500 more expensive than the small unit. We'll probably only use the pool on the weekends. Not sure how long it will take to break even on this with running it for only a couple days per week.
d? Is it worth the extra cost?
get a natural gas heater or propane if its available.
electric will be the slowest and most expensive and definetely get pool cover.
if you live in the desert southwest get a solar pool heater.
the higher the BTUs the faster the warm up time, up to the limit of your main electric service
112,000 BTUs (40 amps/5.8 KW). I'm thinking that a larger unit that puts out
141,000 BTUs (50 amps/6.4KW), would heat the pool quicker and require less time on, thus use, in theory, less electricity - but it's about $500 more expensive than the small unit. We'll probably only use the pool on the weekends. Not sure how long it will take to break even on this with running it for only a couple days per week.
it worth the extra cost?
If you don't have a cover, forget about heat. I have a 330,000 BTU gas heater that won't keep a pool that size warm overnight without the cover.
t 112,000 BTUs (40 amps/5.8 KW). I'm thinking that a larger unit that pu ts out 141,000 BTUs (50 amps/6.4KW), would heat the pool quicker and requir e less time on, thus use, in theory, less electricity - but it's about $500 more expensive than the small unit. We'll probably only use the pool on the weekends. Not sure how long it will take to break even on this with running it for only a couple days per week.
d? Is it worth the extra cost?
You would be better getting some sort of solar heater.
Running a swimming pool is always going to be expensive. Gas would be far cheaper than electricity. Electricity is the worst possible option. If your pool is near the house you may be able to use the home heating furnace if you have a wet system. You need a good insulated pool cover. Ideally there should be insulation between the pool and the ground too.
The economics of turning a pool heating off are very dodgy as it takes days for the pool to reheat. Reducing temperature may be an option.
Your incoming power supply may not be big enough in any event. You may need a three phase supply.
Thanks for the replies and thoughts, everyone. Let me try to reply to ever yone in one post.
I live in South Florida, so it's fairly sunny here for most of the year and the nights are normally just as hot as the days.
No propane or natural gas here in my area.
I have neighbors who have solar systems and they told me to save my money. Once the temperature dips down below 75 or so, they don't generate enough heat for them. I also don't like having all that weight on my roof tiles. Just my preference on that one.
No home furnace - electric heat in the house.
A pool cover is definitely an option. I think all my neighbors have heater s, yet, strangely, none of them use a cover.
No, there is no insulation between the pool and the ground. It doesn't get that cold down here for that kind of thing, I would think.
nd the nights are normally just as hot as the days.
. Once the temperature dips down below 75 or so, they don't generate eno ugh heat for them. I also don't like having all that weight on my roof t iles. Just my preference on that one.
aters, yet, strangely, none of them use a cover.
get that cold down here for that kind of thing, I would think.- Hide quote d text -
First, the idea that the bigger heat pump is going to be less expensive to use because it will be on for less time isn't right. Yes, it will be on for less time, but it will also be using proportionately more electricity than the smaller unit while it's running. There isn't a free lunch here. The real advantage of the larger one is that it will heat the pool faster, so if it's not at temp and you want to raise it, that will be possible faster. In the case of a pool heater, it's better to be too large than too small, for sure.
Usually nat gas is going to be significantly less expensive than a heat pump, but it depends on the relative cost of the two fuels where you are. As others have said, for FL, I would definitely be looking at solar. You need an array roughly the size of the pool. Plus, if you do solar, you may not need to screw around with a cover. When you're paying for fuel, a cover makes a huge difference in the operating cost. With solar, you have to move the water to filter anyway, so heating it is essentially close to free after the system is paid for. And the additional cost to add it is the cost of the solar array, the additional piping, and a controller. You will probably recover the cost of it versus shelling out $$$$ for electricity or other fuel in just a few years.
Also, the size of the heater you need depends on what you want to do with it. If you're just trying to boost the temp a bit at times and extend the season a bit, you can get away with a smaller unit. If you want to keep the pool open year round and use it in any weather conditions, then you need a bigger one.
I would go talk to some neighbors in your area and see what they are doing, get recommendations, etc.
112,000 BTUs (40 amps/5.8 KW). I'm thinking that a larger unit that puts out
141,000 BTUs (50 amps/6.4KW), would heat the pool quicker and require less time on, thus use, in theory, less electricity - but it's about $500 more expensive than the small unit. We'll probably only use the pool on the weekends. Not sure how long it will take to break even on this with running it for only a couple days per week.
Is it worth the extra cost?
Harry is right, solar is the way to go but if you are very far north, that may still not be enough.
Most of the pools in my neighborhood (SW Fla) are solar heated. The practical limit for an uncovered pool is really only about 10 degrees above the average daily ambient temp. You may end up with 80 degree water in the afternoon on a 70 degree day but by morning that will be back down in the low 70s. A cover makes a huge difference in that. My neighbor across the street has more collector area than pool surface and they can hold 86 or higher most of the winter (45-50f at night) When it gets much colder than that, they don't do as well.
I have less collector than pool area and no cover. The only thing solar does for me in knock the chill off in the spring and fall. I changed the plumbing so I can switch over to the spa. THAT is a heluva deal. When the solars are useless on the pool, I can still get the spa up in the high 80s or low 90s before I kick on the heater. In the spring and fall, I can get all the heat I need from the solars in the day and only need the heater to maintain the heat until I am done with it We do not heat the spa with the heater unless we are in it.
Typically the only controller on a solar pool heater is a timer on the pump. I am going to tie the spa solar into the thermostat tho because this spring I caught it at 120 ;-)
Harry You virtually never see 3 phase at a residence but we do see 400 amp single phase service on a big house.
As gee whiz info, my wife's country club has 7 heated pools, uncovered. They can't hold the temp with 10 ton heat pumps on the small pools if we have a cold snap. The big pool has 30 tons
I will try to get the cost, they are all on separate meters.
he correct unit for my needs (an Aquacal TropiCal) puts out 112,000 BTUs (4
0 amps/5.8 KW). I'm thinking that a larger unit that puts out 141,000 BTUs (50 amps/6.4KW), would heat the pool quicker and require less time on, thus use, in theory, less electricity - but it's about $500 more expensive than the small unit. We'll probably only use the pool on the weekends. Not sure how long it will take to break even on this with running it for only a cou ple days per week. Anybody have any thoughts or opinions about this? Is my thinking skewed? Is it worth the extra cost? Thanks!
1 btu raises 1 gal of water 1 deg so do the math.
correct unit for my needs (an Aquacal TropiCal) puts out 112,000 BTUs (40 amps/5.8 KW). I'm thinking that a larger unit that puts out 141,000 BTUs (50 amps/6.4KW), would heat the pool quicker and require less time on, thus use, in theory, less electricity - but it's about $500 more expensive than the small unit. We'll probably only use the pool on the weekends. Not sure how long it will take to break even on this with running it for only a couple days per week. Anybody have any thoughts or opinions about this? Is my thinking skewed? Is it worth the extra cost? Thanks!
Then the issue becomes, how much do you lose to the air, not as simple a calculation.
When the hottest water concentrates at the top, this ends up being a bigger part than simply the volume and the BTU. With that 330k btu heater, my water stratifies to the point that it feels great at the top but it is cold at the bottom. A 1HP pump can't keep up with convection.
the correct unit for my needs (an Aquacal TropiCal) puts out 112,000 BTUs (40 amps/5.8 KW). I'm thinking that a larger unit that puts out 141,000 BTU s (50 amps/6.4KW), would heat the pool quicker and require less time on, th us use, in theory, less electricity - but it's about $500 more expensive th an the small unit. We'll probably only use the pool on the weekends. Not su re how long it will take to break even on this with running it for only a c ouple days per week. Anybody have any thoughts or opinions about this? Is m y thinking skewed? Is it worth the extra cost? Thanks!
The other piece necessary is that heating eqpt is rated in BTU's per hour, so a heater with 100K BTU output rating, should raise the temp of 100,000 gallons of water one degree in one hour. I don't know how heat pump units are rated, but with gas fired units, the BTUs are typically the INPUT energy, so you have to decrease that by the efficiency of the particular unit. If a 100K unit is 80% efficient, then it's putting out 80K btus.
The big unknown is the rate of heat loss of the pool and that is going to slow down the heat rise.
at the correct unit for my needs (an Aquacal TropiCal) puts out 112,000 BTU s (40 amps/5.8 KW). I'm thinking that a larger unit that puts out 141,000 B TUs (50 amps/6.4KW), would heat the pool quicker and require less time on, thus use, in theory, less electricity - but it's about $500 more expensive than the small unit. We'll probably only use the pool on the weekends. Not sure how long it will take to break even on this with running it for only a couple days per week. Anybody have any thoughts or opinions about this? Is my thinking skewed? Is it worth the extra cost? Thanks!
Well shiver me timbers...... James made a mistake and I didn't catch it. A btu is not the amount of energy to raise one gallon of water one degree. It's the amount of energy to raise ONE POUND of water one degree F.
correct unit for my needs (an Aquacal TropiCal) puts out 112,000 BTUs (40 amps/5.8 KW). I'm thinking that a larger unit that puts out 141,000 BTUs (50 amps/6.4KW), would heat the pool quicker and require less time on, thus use, in theory, less electricity - but it's about $500 more expensive than the small unit. We'll probably only use the pool on the weekends. Not sure how long it will take to break even on this with running it for only a couple days per week. Anybody have any thoughts or opinions about this? Is my thinking skewed? Is it worth the extra cost? Thanks!
No, it's about 1/8 that. A btu is the amount of heat it takes to raise a POUND of water 1F. ~8.3 pounds per gallon.
The OP could get a solar blanket but they do tend to deteriorate quickly in chlorine pools.
The last thing he should get is an electric pool heater unless he just isn't concerned about money. I'm surprised they sell them and anyone would buy one.
If I just had to have a heated pool in his situation, I'd consider a solar heater, or do the cost analysis of getting a propane tank. A propane tank may cost a lot up front but, the electric heater is going to cost a lot more in the long run. I had a electric spa and got rid of it after one season. I have a gas heater for my pool/spa now and love it. I don't think the OP understands what it takes to heat a pool.
It's not a purely electric heater. It's a heat pump. And just like you can heat a home with them economically in some parts of the country, apparently you can also heat a pool. It depends on what the options are and what the cost of electricity is.
maybe he should just dump the heat from his house heat pump into the pool (assuming that's how he cools the house) I know it won't provide all the heat but it should provide some and at no additional cost other than the initial set-up
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.