OT - Geothermal Heat issue...?

Page 4 of 5  
Kenneth wrote:

Are you sure it is constant--at least I was unaware that W-F used single-speed units--they weren't when we did ours anyway, but that's been quite a while ago.
Even if so, it does not lead to the conclusion. The savings of a setback depend on the integral of the the demand over the time period--if the average demand is lower, then the input required is lower for a similar set of external conditions.
The only kicker in the mix is whether there really would be such a significant loss in efficiency owing to the heat source "drawdown" that the overall system efficiency drops sufficiently to cause more energy to be used than is saved. I have an extremely difficult time believing that to be at all likely.
See my other response for some suggested places to look for some more definitive research and sources.
--
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Kenneth wrote:
[...asking about setback and subject...]
Don't know if you gave up or got an answer but I mentioned the OSU site earlier. Being bored, I went and found it -- here's the current link. Didn't find a specific answer in the faq's, but they have a couple of contact ways you can get to them.
http://www.igshpa.okstate.edu/index.htm
hth...
--
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Kenneth wrote:

hi all!
i sent this email to Alliant Energy Geothermal ==============there is a discussion underway with this as topic: - We heat and cool our home geothermally (water to air system.) We would, of course, like to decrease our costs further if we can, and so have explored the benefits of setting our thermostat lower at those times when the house (or parts of it) are not occupied. The folks who designed the heating system say that with these systems, it is best to leave the set temp unchanged. Of course, I have asked "why", but when I do, it seems that smoke starts to come out of the phone. In essence, they say that it is "best" but seem unable to say why. Might any of you know what would be best in this regard , and particularly whether the issue of thermostat setback is actually any different for geothermal systems? could you help me understand the issues involved? thanks in advance for any input! chuck b:-) =============and i got this reply -----------------------
Dear Chuck,
Set-up of a Geo system temperature during the cooling time of year should allow a Geo system to recover the cooling and dehumidify as quickly and more efficiently than other air sourced cooling systems.
Set-back is not typically recommended during the heating time of year due to 1) a slower recovery time for heating, 2) the potential for the back up electric elements kicking in to boost the reheating rate but, at an added electric expense to you, 3) dependent on if you use a straight well water open loop or only a minimal to non freeze protected closed loop fluid, the lack of normal flows may allow for a potential for a loop to freeze up and 4) many people who own set-back thermostats are easily confused by the instructions for operating them and re-setting them.
All of these can cause contractor callbacks, they hate callbacks.
We do have a few of our regional Geo system owners who do a slight setback for heating at maybe 2 to 4 degrees F maximum for 4 to 6 hours but, all must realize the potential results.
During AC season and the daytime hours of unoccupied homes, they might also do set up to minimize On Peak energy charges when they choose Time of Use electric rate options.
I hope this helps. Thanks for the inquiry.
Leo
From: Alliant Energy Geothermal Web Forms [mailto: snipped-for-privacy@alliantenergy.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2007 9:29 PM To: Geothermal Cc: Webmaster Subject: Alliant Energy Geothermal -- Contact Us Form
chuck b:-)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Now that has a few good answers. I would not have thought about the freezing closed loops.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 22:21:13 -0500, Jim Behning

Howdy,
Any responsibly designed system protects against such freezing...
All the best,
--
Kenneth

If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS."
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Kenneth wrote:

...
...
My thinking precisely. The response basically is a bunch of weasel-words. The upshot basically is if the aux heat issue is taken care of properly and one doesn't mind the recovery time, setback will save. For a reasonable source capacity, our experience was that while the outlet temperatures aren't equivalent to gas, they're sufficiently high the air feels "warm enough" circulating as opposed to the and as compared to air-air heat pump that felt cool...
If there's freeze-up w/ a few degrees setback so the unit runs a little less at night, there's going to be freeze up on other days as well...
--
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Kenneth wrote:

but on the other hand:
from your OP "The folks who designed the heating system say that with these systems, it is best to leave the set temp unchanged."
any system that is operated outside it's design criteria risks failure!
good luck with yours!
chuck b:-)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
chuckb wrote:

..
A few degrees lower is "outside the design" for a residential hvac system? I still think there's been no rational basis for the proscription given unless, as Ken says, there's a problem--and if there's a problem, I think there will be a problem irrespective of the setback.
--
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
dpb wrote:

you seem to be reading things that i didn't say or if i did i certainly did not mean to.. oh well, have a good day!
chuck b:-)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
chuckb wrote:

...
Well, what _did_ you mean, then???
--
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Hi Chuck,
It would seem that I have not communicated clearly...
Indeed, the design folks tell me not to use any setback, but they seem unable to tell me "why." Their lack of a meaningful explanation was the cause of my original question about the setback issue.
All the best,
--
Kenneth

If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS."
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

The rate at which your house loses heat to the environment depends in an almost linear fashion on the temperature difference between your house and the outside environment.
So as your house cools, the rate at which it loses heat will decrease. Keeping the house at the higher temperature means it will constantly lose heat at that higher rate, and all of that heat lost must be mad eup to maintain the temperature. If you let it cool down and heat it back up the 'stored' heat that is lost to the environment while cooling is exactly equal to the extra heat needed to heat it back up. But the heat loss to the enviornment is less the whol time during which the house is cooler than normal.
Ergo, it ALWAY will use less heat to let it cool down and heat it back up than to maintain it at the higher temperature.
What comes into play is the cost of pumping that heat into your house at the higher rate for the short period of time during which it heats back up. If that is down with auxillary electric resistance heat that MAY cost more or use more energy overall than just keeping it warm.
The presumption that you have an auxiliary heating system may be part of the reason why you get advice to the contrary. Another concern may be that cycling the temperature may result in persistent cold spots or condensation problems that could lead to overall dissatisfaction with the system.
But mostly I doubt you have ever spoken on the phone with anyone who actually studied heat transfer phenomenon or even took a physics course ever.
The other possibility suggested is that extracting heat too fast from the groundwater could create a pool of cooled water underground with a resultant lower efficiency of heat extraction. That would depend largely on the groundwater environment and how extensive the heat exchange area is underground.
I doubt that a definitive general answer can be given regarding that last concern. It would be highly dependent on the specific situation.
--
FF



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 2 Dec 2007 09:55:59 -0800 (PST), Fred the Red Shirt

Hello to all (again),
Well, I am the OP on this "Will I save if I use a thermostat setback on my geothermal system" thread, and I believe that I now have an answer:
Part of the hassle I faced in experimenting with this was that for some reason, I kept thinking only of my house. We have a number of electrical appliances there that are used (essentially) randomly, and their use would certainly throw off any comparisons that I could make over a relatively short period of time.
I commented on that to my wife, and she said "So do the experiment in the barn." (She did not actually say "So do the experiment in the barn, you idiot", but that is what I heard.)
Our office-barn is heated with exactly the same system as is our house (water to air geo with no backup resistance heat) and there is no variability of electrical consumption other than the heating system for most of each day.
So, with that information, I did a very simple experiment. I have run it only for six days but, as you will see, the pattern seems quite clear:
I set the programmable thermostat to drop the "call heat" temperature by 10 degrees F for 12 hours on alternating nights.
Each morning, at the same time, I read the barn's electric meter.
Finally, I got the degree days, and wind speed, from a weather service site.
With that, I could calculate the ratio of KWH to Degree Day. I have also included in the table below the reported max wind speed for the day.
KWH/DD WS
Day 1: 1.2 (setback) 14
Day 2: 1.6 (no setback) 17
Day 3: 1.0 (setback) 8
Day 4: 1.3 (no setback) 0
Day 5: 1.0 (setback) 12
Day 6: 1.2 (no setback) 3
So, on the days with setback, the mean KWH/DD was 1.06. On the days with no setback, that mean was 1.36.
The resulting savings are approximately 22%.
I do remain baffled by the reasons the geothermal folks (installers, designers, sellers) seem to be consistent in suggesting that such setbacks are not of value.
All the best,
--
Kenneth

If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS."
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Kenneth wrote: ...

As at least one other poster noted, they're concerned w/ other factors that aren't applicable in your case (primarily dominated by the use of resistance electric heat in many/most systems)...
There are others including the potential freezeup, etc., that are possible but imo they're mostly cya kinds of responses. Did you try the Water Furnace people directly or contact the Okla State or some of the other resources for other input?
--
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Howdy,
The CYA analysis makes sense to me, but as you probably know, there is no real "freeze up" danger at all. These systems simply turn themselves off is the incoming water is too cold.
Also, as you may know "Water Furnace" is a brand name. Our equipment is ClimateMaster.
I have communicated about all this at some length with the ClimateMaster folks, with the geo folks from my electric utility, and with the installer of the equipment. They all have said "no setback" is best.
All the best,
--
Kenneth

If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS."
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Kenneth wrote:

The problem I've normally seen is on the once-through water exchange systems (which is also what I think I recall being mentioned in one of the earlier postings of a problem--whether it was yours or another I don't recall) is the freezeup of the outlet when systems aren't running. My opinion remains as I noted there is that if that's a problem for a given system, it will be so whether there's a setback or not unless the system is so undersized as to run continuously; hence my assessment of that as a response as being in the "CYA" category.

Yes, I had thought that was who you had said earlier...I don't know ClimateMaster; had a Water Furnace system earlier and was pretty impressed w/ their factory rep service/technical support.

I think again all of those folks are addressing the general case still rather than the specifics of a given installation and are still using the answer that is easiest for them. It would be interesting if could get to one of the actual research facilities that might address a specific system rather than the general consumer response. If you were still interested in pursuing it from that standpoint I'd again suggest ORNL, TVA R&D (not power) or OSU might be more likely to answer a real question.
--
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Hi again,
For me there are two (essentially unrelated) issues:
First, I am concerned with my system(s) and whatever savings I might realize with the setbacks.
Second, I am a curious sort, and often enjoy understanding this sort of thing.
Right now, my energies are focused on #1, and with my very simple experiment, I do believe I have my answer.
#2 will have to wait a bit!
All the best,
--
Kenneth

If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS."
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Kenneth wrote: ...

The answer to the first is clear -- a lower setpoint is less total integrated demand as compared to no setback so unless there are mitigating factors such as the higher-rate aux heat (that you don't have), then a setback will invariably be less input.
The other issues are also system-specific but the design issues have been dealt with by the various research groups. I never had a convenient water source so didn't pursue the logistics of them that much.
--
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Kenneth wrote:

What was the recovery time after the setback days?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 08 Dec 2007 11:48:34 -0700, Doug Winterburn

Hi Doug,
I don't know with certainty, but I do know it to be less than an hour.
All the best,
--
Kenneth

If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS."
  Click to see the full signature.
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.