House warming.

[Mw Roofline]

We live in a new build (that I built myself) where I went stupid on the insulation. As well as the floors and ceilings I've got a 100mm cavity filled with wool plus thermal plaster boards. All the windows are triple glazed.

I used the heating for 12 months on timed and just finished the last 12 months on constant and it's about 100 quid a year cheaper on constant.

This geezer spends less a year, than you've saved, MW





http://www.telegraph.co.uk/property...use-that-costs-60-a-year-to-heat.html[/QUOTE]

Blimey!

Easily a 20 to 25k setup though

 

[Gasman28]

There is nothing remotely complicated about this.

Heat moves from a hotter object to a colder one (e.g. from your living room into your garden).

The amount of heat lost is directly proportional to (1) temperature difference and (2) time.

So the longer you heat it, and the higher the temperature, the more heat (energy) will get out, and the more fuel (energy) you will put in, and the more money you will spend.

The amount of insulation you have, and the technology of your building construction, does not change any of that.

If you want to ask an entirely different question, like "what will make my house feel more comfortable" or "how quickly will my house warm up and cool down" or "what temperature should I heat my house" or "should I insulate my home" then there are lots of other things you can discuss. But they will not change the answer to your original question.

As Scotty used to say "Ye cannae change the laws o' physics"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermodynamics[/QUOTE]
You really do speak a load of ******

 

[jockscott]

The amount of heat lost is directly proportional to (1) temperature difference and (2) time.

So then professor. Your telling me if I fill a thermos flask up with water at 90 deg C and fill an ordinary bottle with water at 90 deg C,, in two hours they'll both be the same temperature?
Your seriously telling us if it's directly proportional to temp and time, and insulation has sweet FA to do with it?

 

[JohnD]

no, Jock, you are failing to grasp what I said.

The OP has one house, and wondered if it would be more economical to heat it 24 hours a day, or when occupied. For his one house, it will be cheaper to heat it only when occupied.

If he moves to another house, which is better or worse insulated than the old one, it will still be cheaper to heat it only when occupied.

If he had asked (which he didn't) "will it be cheaper to heat a badly insulated house or a well-insulated house," the answer would have been "the well-insulated house."

So your analogy would be:

Fill a thermos flask with boiling water, and apply enough heat to keep it boiling for 24 hours.

Fill another thermos flask with boiling water, and apply enough heat to keep it boiling for four hours in the morning, and again for six hours in the evening.

Are you seriously telling me that you cannot grasp which flask will need more energy?

It would be really funny if gasman could ask his chums in the chamber to find an error in the post which he fails to understand.