# Replace furnace or not



## Brian K (Jan 29, 2011)

I have a 1987 Lennox G8 furnace that still has a pilot light. It works great and the heat exchanger is fine and I can fix the few minor troubles myself. The only things that have gone wrong in 33 years have been a thermocouple ($10) and I cleaned out the pilot burner because it would blow out occasionally because there was some dust in the pilot just before the orifice which produced a weak flame. I clean it myself and don't get an 'expert' into clean the dust out and oil the motor. I read the info on this web site and found it very well written and it exposes many of the sales tactics used by some places.
https://carbonmonoxidemyths.com/myths/

I have tracked my GJ usage and costs by month for the past 10 years. The average winter consumption is 94.7 GJ's and summer consumption is 25.8 GJ's for a total of ~120 GJ/year. (sorry I get billed in GJ's not SCF of BTU's but you get the idea of comsumption ratios). So based on that, my summer usage is basically for hot water (NG furnace and hot water tank) so the difference is my heating load during the winter - 68.9 GJ's. 
Average winter gas cost is $832 and summer gas cost is $256 - a total of about $1100 per year.

If I get a new super duper high efficiency furnace, if I assume an efficiency improvement of 35%, then I would save about ~24 GJ's in the winter. My average GJ cost in the winter is $8.78/GJ delivered (and taxed) so a new furnace should save me ~$210 per year. (In fact, the total gas charge is based on fixed and variable costs, so the true cost savings in using less gas would probably raise the average cost because the fixed costs remain the same and the variable costs would be lower due to less consumption.)

While that is great, the new furnace would require a $150 yearly inspection to maintain the warranty plus the interest cost of a new $5000 furnace at 5% is $250 so the total yearly cost of a new furnace is $400 and I would save ~$210 so the net ADDITIONAL cost is $190 to enjoy a new high efficiency furnace. Whatttttt??? And if it fails, I need to call 'the guy' but with my old furnace, I can fix the few things that go wrong myself and mine is exceedingly simple compared to the new ones with multiple heat exchangers and controls. Plus 'they' say I can expect a new furnace to last 10 years. I went to a Homeshow a few years ago with my GJ usage and cost numbers and talked to a few companies pushing their furnace installation services. Once we reviewed my numbers and assumptions, most agreed with me and a few said "we have never seen actual consumption & cost numbers - can we have a copy of your data? Really???? So I still keep my old furnace. 
Has anyone else that has gotten a new furnace kept track of savings to validate that changing it was the right way to save money.


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

The efficiency details that are advertised are all based on test labs and I doubt real world savings would come close. My brother in law got an on demand water heater a few years back when we were getting home Reno credits. He says his gas bill didn’t change at all. They’re are so many factors, weather being the biggest one, that make YoY changes hard to determine. While my utility provider provides usage vs outdoor temperature year over year, my home is most effected by sunlight. It seems I get the most sunlight on the coldest winter days, and my furnace doesn’t run at all during the day.

I’m usually inclined not to replace appliances that are still working for many of the points you raise.

I *would* definitely recommend having your unit inspected and tested for carbon monoxide. the unit in our old house had a leak (two independent tests), yet didn’t set off the CO detector. It was repaired for almost nothing due to our maintenance plan and a Class action law suit that was settled due to manufacturing defects.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

I upgraded my furance about 8 years ago from one that more than 50 years old. At the time there was a Federal Gov. grant money for doing upgrades which saved me an additional $800 off on the furnace IIRC. When I bought the furance I worked out with the guy to give me a fixed price of $99 for cleaning for 5 years. BTW, video the guy doing the cleaning and do it yourself after the warranty is over ... not that difficult.

Being one who likes to collect data on such things, I did compare my savings for the first few years but don't have that spreadsheet anymore. To complicate matters I also upgraded my home insulation at the same time (additional rebate money) so it wouldn't be just the furance data I was comparing. I do remember the savings were significant so the upgrades were money well spent for me.

On a side note, wish I had this way back, I have an automated furance usage monitor now and also collect weather data to compare.
Here is the last 20 days ... 
Date | % on | mean temp | mean windchill

2020-01-05 30% -7.500 -13
2020-01-06 33% -7.500 -16
2020-01-07 48% -16.40 -29
2020-01-08 51% -20.50 -29
2020-01-09 42% -15.30 -24
2020-01-10 48% -21.10 -31
2020-01-11 53% -21.90 -32
2020-01-12 42% -12.80 -22
2020-01-13 37% -7.600 -14
2020-01-14 42% -16.40 -25
2020-01-15 52% -25.20 -35
2020-01-16 54% -27.90 -38
2020-01-17 47% -14.10 -23
2020-01-18 45% -11.60 -24
2020-01-19 43% -20.10 -26
2020-01-20 50% -22.80 -32
2020-01-21 47% -12.80 -25
2020-01-22 34% -10.20 -14
2020-01-23 33% -7.500 -13
2020-01-24 32% -6.000 -11
2020-01-25 34% -5.900 -12

IMO, I think if your older furnace is working fine and is safe I'd stick with it. The new ones are far more complicated (just look inside at all the wiring and crap in there now) so much more likely to have repair bills in the future.


----------



## Brian K (Jan 29, 2011)

Thanks for your recommendation of an inspection. While I'm not an 'expert', I have inspected the furnace heat exchanger in detail looking for cracks with a scope and a number of other techniques - it's fine and the flame doesn't show flickering when the fan comes on - a sign of house air from the blower getting into the combustion chamber and adding air to the combustion process thus blowing the flame around. And I have numerous CO monitors in various locations - all good. Have a look at the web site I mentioned. Lots of great info about CO and myths about it. My mother (in Ottawa) had the 'expert' come in because of a furnace problem. "You have a CO issue" the guy said trying to scare her into agreeing to a new furnace. When pushed hard, it's turned out the problem was high CO in the exhaust going up the chimney- not in the house. 3 repair visits later (under contract), the problem was the Induced Draft fan spinning too slowly but they sure looked hard for a cracked heat exchanger. Colour me skeptical when it comes to furnace repair guys - but that isn't the point of my post. Also my furnace is 33 years old - not much chance of class action lawsuits to help with replacements lol!

I also notice that my furnace doesn't run much when it is sunny out either - my house is 2*6 construction (unless it's brass monkey weather as it has been in Alberta in Jan). My YOY consumption indicates similar usage with minor variations and the averages seem to support my thoughts of 'replacing with a high efficiency unit won't save any money'.

I agree with not changing appliances just because it is supposed to save on consumption and I've heard similar comments about those on demand water heaters. Their advantage is endless hot water not money savings! I want to save money!


----------



## Brian K (Jan 29, 2011)

Cainvest - thanks for the idea of a furnace operation monitor. I'll install an elapsed time meter on mine. Then I can monitor minutes per hour of operation but as your data shows - if it's colder out, the furnace will run more - (kind of like my nose when I walk the dog!)

Also - I have watched Techs clean a furnace. Not really anything to calibrate other than gas pressure to the burners and they also vacuum or blow out some dust. The big thing to do is oil the blower motor - if it has the oil ports but most new blowers don't have them. Longevity you say! Make it last a bit longer than the warranty.


----------



## birdman (Feb 12, 2013)

While I cannot specifically answer your question I replaced my electric furnace (used as backup to our top of the line heat pump) with a new gas furnace and now just use the heat pump for air conditioning. Up until recently we did not have natural gas available to our home but with the skyrocketing cost of electric heat we decided to switch. Annual operating costs (gas and electricity) dropped by 35% (we live in the Okanagan) or about $1,000. a year. More importantly, the new furnace is great. It is modulating and you never hear the furnace come on unless you get up early and crank the heat up. I believe I got either 3 or 5 yrs of free annual servicing when I made the purchase. When we visit our kids they both have old furnaces which go off and on all night in the winter and then you get a blast of heat (and noise) for a few minutes and then it of course shuts down but you are awakened an hour later when it comes on again. Annoying. However, the one thing I do hear is that the new furnaces certainly don't last as long as the old ones did.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

Brian K said:


> Cainvest - thanks for the idea of a furnace operation monitor. I'll install an elapsed time meter on mine. Then I can monitor minutes per hour of operation but as your data shows - if it's colder out, the furnace will run more - (kind of like my nose when I walk the dog!)
> 
> Also - I have watched Techs clean a furnace. Not really anything to calibrate other than gas pressure to the burners and they also vacuum or blow out some dust. The big thing to do is oil the blower motor - if it has the oil ports but most new blowers don't have them. Longevity you say! Make it last a bit longer than the warranty.


A furnace monitor will give you a much better idea of what's going on but still not perfect due to untracked variables. Honestly, I just did it for fun but if I do further insulation upgrades (still have a few areas I could improve) I should get a very good idea of what they did for me.

BTW, many of the new furnace motors are DC so "they say" you'll save additional money on electricity .... I bet it's minimal.


----------



## Brian K (Jan 29, 2011)

Frase. Interesting you went from Electric to Gas when all the greenies are saying electric is so much better. In Alberta, more and more electricity is being generated by gas fired power stations so I'm not sure why the greenies say electricity is so much better than gas for home use - all that is doing is moving the emissions somewhere else. Of course Nukes produce no (direct) carbon emissions - but last time someone suggested a Nuke in Alberta, there was an uproar of opposition. And the new Hydro dam in BC also seems to have its opponents - reminds me of NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) and BANANA (Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything).

I have an App on my phone that does energy conversions and it says that 1 GJ of gas is equivalent to 277 kw's. Whenever I do the math on my actual expenses for both power and gas (bill total divided by usage), I find that electricity costs about $0.22 per KWhr and gas costs about $8.00 per GJ averaged over a year, so based on that, 1 GJ cost $8.00 and 277 kwhr * $0.22 = ~$60 for an equivalent amount of energy. So that means gas is nearly 10% of the cost of electricity. Of course efficiencies come into play but even at 50% with efficiency losses, KWrs cost 5 times as much as gas. I can't for life of me wonder why people install electric water heaters rather than gas (other than the initial higher installation cost of gas and exhaust by builders).

I've often wondered about the modulation furnaces and interested to hear that your experience is much better than the on/off type of furnace that used to be the norm. When the day comes for me to replace the furnace, I'll really consider a modulating type. And I hope it lasts longer than 10 years. But oh wait - that is how long lots of warranties are so I guess they have designs that last 10 years plus a day or 2!


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

Brian K said:


> Frase. Interesting you went from Electric to Gas when all the greenies are saying electric is so much better. In Alberta, more and more electricity is being generated by gas fired power stations so I'm not sure why the greenies say electricity is so much better than gas for home use - all that is doing is moving the emissions somewhere else. Of course Nukes produce no (direct) carbon emissions - but last time someone suggested a Nuke in Alberta, there was an uproar of opposition. And the new Hydro dam in BC also seems to have its opponents - reminds me of NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) and BANANA (Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything).
> 
> I have an App on my phone that does energy conversions and it says that 1 GJ of gas is equivalent to 277 kw's. Whenever I do the math on my actual expenses for both power and gas (bill total divided by usage), I find that electricity costs about $0.22 per KWhr and gas costs about $8.00 per GJ averaged over a year, so based on that, 1 GJ cost $8.00 and 277 kwhr * $0.22 = ~$60 for an equivalent amount of energy. So that means gas is nearly 10% of the cost of electricity. Of course efficiencies come into play but even at 50% with efficiency losses, KWrs cost 5 times as much as gas. I can't for life of me wonder why people install electric water heaters rather than gas (other than the initial higher installation cost of gas and exhaust by builders).
> 
> I've often wondered about the modulation furnaces and interested to hear that your experience is much better than the on/off type of furnace that used to be the norm. When the day comes for me to replace the furnace, I'll really consider a modulating type. And I hope it lasts longer than 10 years. But oh wait - that is how long lots of warranties are so I guess they have designs that last 10 years plus a day or 2!


Most who choose electric hot water (or heat) do so as there is no gas available. Propane is an option but not that much cheaper than electric and less convenient.

The talk about electric heat is focused on the ever improving heat pumps. They can apparently now provide heat well below freezing. Ours is about 10 years old and is fantastic til about 5 degrees. After that, it gets pricey, but I would suspect the shoulder months are cheaper than nat gas.


----------



## Brian K (Jan 29, 2011)

In Alberta where there is lots of natural gas, some new home vendors were installing electric water tanks because they were cheaper to install (wires vs gas line and exhaust) which made the house cheaper. Also this was done when the plastic exhaust pipe venting code guru's were still learning how to install these.

Electric heat pumps are basically A/C operating in reverse. Still pricey to operate but better than electric heating elements.

Where is the little Nuke in every basement that Popular Mechanics in the 60's promised? That would fix all our problems - well almost.


----------



## gardner (Feb 13, 2014)

I assume you have a CO detector in the room with the furnace and in your living area. If you have good CO detectors and the furnace is working, there's likely no need to worry.

The risk is that it will fail and will be irreparable -- eg, the heat exchanger develops a crack or the motor fails or something -- leaving you in the lurch. You'll need to replace the whole thing right away and maybe at a highly inopportune time. I assume your old furnace is natural draft one. All the new ones you can get are forced induction meaning that a new furnace will require new vents installed, holes drilled through walls, a condensate pump and plumbing to drain into and so forth. Possibly making an unplanned emergency installation more expensive.


----------



## Brian K (Jan 29, 2011)

Yes - 3 CO detectors in the house - 1 by the furnace, 1 in the basement TV room, and 1 in my bedroom by the heating vent and most importantly they are within their Best Before date. CO is heavier than air so that is why I have 2 in the basement and only 1 upstairs (but it is nearly on top of the heating vent). 

I understand that Murphy also works on furnaces - what can go wrong. will. at the worst possible time. I clean my furnace every year, oil the blower motor every year with a few drops of oil, have a look at the heat exhanger and also check the operating temperatures to ensure that switches are working correctly and I change the filter regularly which ensures the heat exchanger doesn't overheat and stress crack. As well I have a spare blower, thermocouple and insertion probe temperature switch for the blower.

I'm surprised that with all the advertisements for new furnaces (people are changing them), no one has chimed in with their experience in how much less their heating bill is with a new furnace (which confirms my usage numbers I guess) - other than the use of a modulation furnace so more stable heat because it's not On/Off which is a good reason to spend a little more when needed. I have friend who got a new furnace 9 years ago, and its heat exchanger was badly corroded with lots of holes in it (fortunately within the warranty period) and the installer told him that the metal in it was very thin to make it efficient and the condensing vapor from the gas burning process caused the corrosion in the heat exchanger. And with all the holes, no CO alarms went off. He said the furnace wasn't putting out much heat - thus the call to the repair guy. 

Gas appliance efficiency is one thing which I support, but I want money efficiency too and don't want to be replacing my furnace every 10 years.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

Brian K said:


> I'm surprised that with all the advertisements for new furnaces (people are changing them), no one has chimed in with their experience in how much less their heating bill is with a new furnace (which confirms my usage numbers I guess)


Probably because 99% of people don't bother to check the difference, they just get a new furnace when they need it and move along. Even if they did look at their bills a year before, the weather plays a significant role so their estimate could be off by a fair margin.

If you just go by the numbers, old furnace 55%-70%, new HE 92-98% that should give you a fair enough gauge of the savings. Kind of like EPA estimates for a car's gas mileage, it's a level playing field for comparison but might not be what "you" actually get yourself.


----------



## Brian K (Jan 29, 2011)

But, but, but this is the frugality section LOL!!! 

My numbers take the old versus new efficiencies into account and I don't see a savings - actually in the end it costs more money. So I guess the take away is 'don't change the furnace to save money - change it when you need a new furnace when the repairs start to cost too much'.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

Yup, sometimes it's just better to stick with what you got, maybe wait to see if a really good deal to comes along.


----------



## birdman (Feb 12, 2013)

Further to my previous post we saved over 30% on our heating costs when we purchased a new furnace but as we moved from electric to gas I realize I am mixing apples and oranges. However, the new furnaces are so nice and quiet you seldom ever hear them. They have programmable thermostats which allows for programming depending on the time of day, schedules, vacation, energy tracking, service reminders, sensors for when you are away, and furthermore, you can check the status of your heat and make changes remotely on your phone. Needless to say I highly recommend the new gas furnaces with programmable thermostats and the modulating motors. Ours senses when it needs heat and turns the fan and heat on very low and these increase as the demand, if any does. The fan may run as low as 7% and then gradually increase speed depending on various factors including outside temperature, thermostat setting, current temperature, desired temperature, etc. Its operation is way beyond me but it is efficient as they come and the quietness and "smart" features are super. Can't say enough good things about them and how pleased we are. Ours is a Bryant with the Evolution control but I am sure there are other brands just as good. We are at our ski condo right now and I just checked the app on my phone and it showed my energy useage, costs, current status, etc on a daily weekly, and monthly basis, etc, etc.
https://www.bryant.com/en/us/products/gas-furnaces/987m/


----------



## prisoner24601 (May 27, 2018)

Money172375 said:


> Most who choose electric hot water (or heat) do so as there is no gas available. Propane is an option but not that much cheaper than electric and less convenient.
> 
> The talk about electric heat is focused on the ever improving heat pumps. They can apparently now provide heat well below freezing. Ours is about 10 years old and is fantastic til about 5 degrees. After that, it gets pricey, but I would suspect the shoulder months are cheaper than nat gas.


That's me (more cheap than green though). I went all electric passive house (passiv haus) when I built our retirement home on the east coast. Calgary house where I raised my family was 208 GJ per year gas and electricity combined. My passive house which is about the same size is -8 GJ (all energy) based on last year actuals with a 12 kW solar (38 GJ year before we put solar in). 0 monthly costs except $11 for power hookup, quiet, reliable - what's not to love? I have a heat demand in 3500 square foot house of only 5.5 kW on coldest night and my two Fujitsi heat pumps easily keep up with that. Electricity costs about $45/GJ where I am. It's hard to beat $8/GJ but another way of looking at it is I avoided over 20,000 kg of Sulpher Dioxide, Carbon Dioxide and Nitrogen Oxide emissions by being better than net zero. So there is that...

Alberta is great for solar compared to almost anywhere else in Canada (a great place to live also I might add). Consider a deep retrofit+solar a green bond in your investment portfolio and sit back and collect the monthly interest payments for 25 years. :cocksure:


----------



## Brian K (Jan 29, 2011)

Interesting you bring up solar in Alberta. A year or 2 ago when we had the commies as a government, they had a push on for putting solar panels on house rooftops to generate KWhr's to offset buying from the grid. One day I was in Lowes and a guy came up and asked if I was interested in getting solar panels for my roof. Of course I said I was. So he got my e-mail address and said I would be getting contacted by their Techie guy. The wanted the house address and a years worth of utility bills. The quote came back for $15,000 and enough panels to generate ~$750 per year of KWhrs. I would also have about a $20 per month (240.yr) bill for billing, franchise fees and some other fixed costs plus whatever my panels wouldn't cover. The idea was that in the day time I would sell excess KWhrs to the grid at $.08/kwhr and at night and when the sun was gone, I'd buy kwhrs at $.08/kwhr plus Dist and Trans costs which push the actual KWhr cost to about $.23/kwhr in a "net" monthly metering calc. Also over the year, I wouldn't be paid for over-generating so if the KWhr's I bought were less than my KWhr usage, I wouldn't get the $.08/kwhr so no point in over sizing the panel system. My present power bill is about $1100 per year. 

In a nutshell - a $15,000 investment would offset $750 per year of KWhr consumption and I would still have a $250 fixed cost fee, plus I'd have to buy the extra required KWhrs I needed and the system would probably last 15-20 years because solar systems loos efficiency over time and the inverter being electronics probably last 20 years before the magic smoke comes out. That is $100 less than my current power bill is now. So I asked "why not just take the $15K and invest it at 5% and make $750 and at the end of 15-20 years, I would still have the $15K in the bank, but my solar system might have to be replaced if it wears out at ~$750 per year and hopefully it lasts 20 years. And what happens if I need a new roof? The panels have to come off and get re-installed at my cost. He said "well if you're not interested we won't proceed". Why would I buy a roof solar system and have to pay more for power than what I pay now. I've had other friends experience similar numbers. I'd love to get green & techie and have solar panels - but I don't want it to actually cost me more than what I pay now. Anyone have panels on their roof? What's the ROI?


----------



## Zipper (Nov 18, 2015)

You are in a loop trying to justify a very old system that will need replacing soon anyway.

Take off the blinders, look for the best rebate offers, research the best companies and just do it.


----------



## Brian K (Jan 29, 2011)

It's not a loop - as someone else said, and I agree, don't replace it until it breaks - chances are, with no electronics on it, it will last many more years. 
Blinders??? I have something reliable now. Why be part of a throwaway society and get on that treadmill?
I just wanted to know if there was something wrong with my calculations on expected efficiency improvements and hopefully cost savings. Apparently my calcs are right.


----------



## Zipper (Nov 18, 2015)

And round and round you go. You are right. Carry on.


----------



## Brian K (Jan 29, 2011)

Thanks for your opinion - it was so helpful.


----------



## prisoner24601 (May 27, 2018)

Brian K said:


> Interesting you bring up solar in Alberta. A year or 2 ago when we had the commies as a government, they had a push on for putting solar panels on house rooftops to generate KWhr's to offset buying from the grid. One day I was in Lowes and a guy came up and asked if I was interested in getting solar panels for my roof. Of course I said I was. So he got my e-mail address and said I would be getting contacted by their Techie guy. The wanted the house address and a years worth of utility bills. The quote came back for $15,000 and enough panels to generate ~$750 per year of KWhrs. I would also have about a $20 per month (240.yr) bill for billing, franchise fees and some other fixed costs plus whatever my panels wouldn't cover. The idea was that in the day time I would sell excess KWhrs to the grid at $.08/kwhr and at night and when the sun was gone, I'd buy kwhrs at $.08/kwhr plus Dist and Trans costs which push the actual KWhr cost to about $.23/kwhr in a "net" monthly metering calc. Also over the year, I wouldn't be paid for over-generating so if the KWhr's I bought were less than my KWhr usage, I wouldn't get the $.08/kwhr so no point in over sizing the panel system. My present power bill is about $1100 per year.
> 
> In a nutshell - a $15,000 investment would offset $750 per year of KWhr consumption and I would still have a $250 fixed cost fee, plus I'd have to buy the extra required KWhrs I needed and the system would probably last 15-20 years because solar systems loos efficiency over time and the inverter being electronics probably last 20 years before the magic smoke comes out. That is $100 less than my current power bill is now. So I asked "why not just take the $15K and invest it at 5% and make $750 and at the end of 15-20 years, I would still have the $15K in the bank, but my solar system might have to be replaced if it wears out at ~$750 per year and hopefully it lasts 20 years. And what happens if I need a new roof? The panels have to come off and get re-installed at my cost. He said "well if you're not interested we won't proceed". Why would I buy a roof solar system and have to pay more for power than what I pay now. I've had other friends experience similar numbers. I'd love to get green & techie and have solar panels - but I don't want it to actually cost me more than what I pay now. Anyone have panels on their roof? What's the ROI?


ROI is about 40K or 6.9%. Here is the cash flow for my system, no rebates available when I put the system in. Doesn't sound like the Alberta net metering deal is very good which is too bad. Where I live I get an annual cheque from power company for any surplus and connection charge is $11 per month only which is a good deal for a limitless virtual battery. Good point on the roof, I have a metal standing seem roof which should outlast the panels (or me)

Cash Flow - with Solar	NPV Cash Flow -with Solar
-31,124	-31,124
2,212	2,212
2,230	2,230
2,245	2,245
2,267	2,267
2,321	2,321
2,376	2,376
2,433	2,433
2,491	2,491
2,550	2,550
2,611	2,611
2,674	2,674
2,737	2,737
2,803	2,803
2,869	2,869
2,938	2,938
3,008	3,008
3,080	3,080
3,153	3,153
3,228	3,228
3,305	3,305
3,384	3,384
3,465	3,465
3,548	3,548
3,632	3,632
3,719	3,719
TOTALS NPV	40,157
TOTALS IRR	6.9%


----------



## Brian K (Jan 29, 2011)

Interesting numbers.
I guess the difference is you can sell your excess KWhrs at a higher rate than we can at what you pay for KWhrs. Years ago, Alberta started raising our bills by splitting out KWhr charge (Generation), Low Voltage Distribution (like around the city and to your house), and transmission from the generator to the distributors. They privatized these functions and therefore that resulted in those companies needing a profit to pay bonuses and shareholders (Enmax, Fortis, Berkshire Hathaway, and TransAlta & Atco), so when we sell back to the grid, we only get the Generation charge - and that depends on what type of plan we sign up for - sell at the same rate as you buy. Generally somewhere from 6.5 to 8 cents per KWhr, and when we buy from the Grid, we of course have to pay all 3 charges, plus of course other fees like billing and Franchise fees which are fixed. The net result is about $0.22 per KWhr which of course has to include GST on all those things so the Fed's get a cut on necessities.
You are lucky you are still on sort of an 'all-in' cost of power so you can sell back at the rate you buy at, and can over generate so your income increases and an incentive to over generate too. A friend of mine who wants to try a solar system is considering claiming the KWhr's he sell as income and then claim the investment in the solar system to earn income as a depreciating asset as a deduction to lower his income/taxes. He asked 2 accountants and they seem to think it will work. Will see if CRA will accept this. This is an interesting twist and if it does get past CRA, that may be a good reason to get in to solar and turn it into a cash flow positive investment rather than just a feel good thing (in our case).


----------



## Brian K (Jan 29, 2011)

I though some might be interested in seeing my latest power bill to compare with your own (or maybe not).

Energy Charge ...................623.759 kWh @ $ 0.080000 / kWh .............$ 49.90 *
(Nov 26 to Dec 23)
Administration Charge ........................................................................$ 5.78*
(Nov 26 to Dec 23)
Delivery Charges - ENMAX Power
(Nov 26 to Dec 23)
Distribution Charge............................................................................$ 21.11*
Transmission Charge .........................................................................$ 12.14*
Balancing Pool Allocation .....................................................................$ 1.85*
Rate Riders ......................................................................................$ 17.09*
Local access fee paid to City................................................................$ 10.88 *
Summary .......................................................................................$ 118.75
GST................................................................................................$ 5.94
Total...............................................................................................$ 124.53

So $124.53/623Kwhrs = $0.199/KWhr. But all we hear is that we only pay 8 cents. LOL


----------



## Mortgage u/w (Feb 6, 2014)

You will only notice a cost savings if you install a heat pump since they keep running in mild weather, eliminating the need for gas/oil you would need to run the furnace.
You'll also notice a difference if your current furnace is not heating efficiently - doesn't mean you need to replace, just means you need to maintain.

As others have mentioned, keep what you have until it breaks down completely.

I bought my house on condition the seller swap out the oil furnace for an electric one. Furnace was only 15 years old, but I did not want to deal with oil. Also, electricity in my province is cheaper than oil but I can't say I did it primarily for the savings.


----------



## BC Eddie (Feb 2, 2014)

Brian K said:


> Electric heat pumps are basically A/C operating in reverse. Still pricey to operate but better than electric heating elements.
> 
> .


Not sure why you say heat pumps are pricey to operate? I have a 24 year old heat pump system (bought house in 2007) that provides me with heat and air conditioning at the relatively lowest costs I have ever experienced in 50 years of home ownership. Several years ago I switched off the auxiliary heat (AH) function and installed a setback thermostat so all my heat comes from the pump function and I have yet to need to switch the AH back on even during the rare period of sub-zero temps. Now I live on Vancouver Island so I am not saying it is the same as Alberta but still I question your general "pricey to operate" claim.

Plus I am not adding as much to the damage to our environment as oil or gas would. This is a very important point for me.


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

BC Eddie said:


> Not sure why you say heat pumps are pricey to operate? I have a 24 year old heat pump system (bought house in 2007) that provides me with heat and air conditioning at the relatively lowest costs I have ever experienced in 50 years of home ownership. Several years ago I switched off the auxiliary heat (AH) function and installed a setback thermostat so all my heat comes from the pump function and I have yet to need to switch the AH back on even during the rare period of sub-zero temps. Now I live on Vancouver Island so I am not saying it is the same as Alberta but still I question your general "pricey to operate" claim.
> 
> Plus I am not adding as much to the damage to our environment as oil or gas would. This is a very important point for me.


We have a heat pump with electric aux. all electric home. My Hydro One Bill (Ontario) was around $600 last feb. was a bit of a shock our first winter here. We’ve switched to equal billing and come in at $275 a month now. Family of four. Daily showers during off peak pricing. Laundry on weekends. All in last month, we paid just over $0.13 kwhr. 70% of our usage was off peak.


----------



## prisoner24601 (May 27, 2018)

Brian K said:


> I though some might be interested in seeing my latest power bill to compare with your own (or maybe not).
> 
> Energy Charge ...................623.759 kWh @ $ 0.080000 / kWh .............$ 49.90 *
> (Nov 26 to Dec 23)
> ...


Brian, that is so interesting I did not realize that is how electricity is sold in Alberta. It changes the math on solar payback for sure


----------



## birdman (Feb 12, 2013)

Heat pump efficiency depends on where you live and the back up or supplemental heat. We have a top of the line heat pump which was very expensive due to our electric furnace back up heat supply. Installed natural gas and as recommended shut off the heat pump and only use it as an air conditioner and reduced our energy costs 30% or so. We live in Kelowna where the winters are cool. Annual costs were reduced from $3,550. to $2,403.00. Our home is a 2100 sq ft rancher with a full walk out lower level. Have a couple of friends in town who also have good heat pumps and they lack efficiency in our climate. Its only been in one year but I am pleased with the savings. If anyone would like our seldom used electric furnace its free for the taking.


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

Brian K said:


> I can't for life of me wonder why people install electric water heaters rather than gas (other than the initial higher installation cost of gas and exhaust by builders).


Well, my electric water heater cost me $390, and a gas water costs ~$998. To convert the present electric to gas costs about $1000.

I have a timer on my electric water heater which heats the water in the middle of the night at the lowest rate and then it lasts all day as I have two blankets on it.

Any gas appliance is subject to carbon tax from the Ontario government. As an example, my gas bill (furnace and dryer) is $93.00 a month and the Carbon Tax on that bill is $17.21. That's 18.5% to pay for a tax grab.

Do you see why I keep my electric water heater?

ltr


----------



## Zipper (Nov 18, 2015)

Absolutely not. TOU is so misleading because when you add on all the additional costs you are not really saving anything. Very few people have electric water heaters (London) because gas is way cheaper.


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

Zipper said:


> Absolutely not. TOU is so misleading because when you add on all the additional costs you are not really saving anything.


Completely don't understand what that means.

ltr


----------



## Zipper (Nov 18, 2015)

Break down your Hydro Bill. Ontario has gamed the system so much that when you add on all the other charges it makes little difference when you use the power. The actual electricity charge is a fraction of the total bill. Natural gas is in in massive surplus now and in the foreseeable future. Why do you think American Utilities are shifting from coal to gas?


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

Zipper said:


> Break down your Hydro Bill. Ontario has gamed the system so much that when you add on all the other charges it makes little difference when you use the power. The actual electricity charge is a small fraction of the total bill. Natural gas is in in massive surplus now and in the foreseeable future. Why do you think American Utilities are shifting from coal to gas?


Hydro web site gives me a nice bar chart per hour of how much electricity I use every day. Mine looks pretty funny with most of the bars near zero except for that hour at 4AM when my water heater timer turns on for 3 hours. That bar on the chart shows for the first hour I use about 3200 watts every night. Since it's at that early off hour of the day, the charge per KWH is $0.065. That calculates to $75.92 a year to heat my water. Let's say the gas costs would be half that, so about $37 a year difference.

Now since an electric water heater cost me $390, and a gas water heater costs $998 and to convert the present electric to gas costs about $1000, I let you do the math how long it would take to make up the difference, but I would guess we'd be on Mars before that would happen, so I'll stick with electric.

ltr


----------



## Zipper (Nov 18, 2015)

Google it. If you live in a city and have access to natural gas, natural gas wins hands down.

If you want to convince yourself that electric water heat is cheaper than gas then have at it.

The facts say otherwise.


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

Zipper said:


> Google it. If you live in a city and have access to natural gas, natural gas wins hands down.
> 
> If you want to convince yourself that electric water heat is cheaper than gas then have at it.
> 
> The facts say otherwise.


I guess you didn't read my posts because I said that my furnace and dryer are indeed natural gas. Just like with my Hydro bill, the Gas bill charges a large list of extras such as delivery, transportation, customer charges and an 18% carbon tax. No carbon tax on my Hydro bill.

As I said, the cost of heating my hot water is $75 a year. That's quite cheap and the saving with gas would take literally decades to make it a smart move to change my water heater to gas. I've done the numbers. I don't have to 'convince' myself as you say. The numbers don't lie.

ltr


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

Zipper said:


> Break down your Hydro Bill. Ontario has gamed the system so much that when you add on all the other charges it makes little difference when you use the power. The actual electricity charge is a small fraction of the total bill. Natural gas is in in massive surplus now and in the foreseeable future. Why do you think American Utilities are shifting from coal to gas?


This is incorrect. The price of the electricity itself doubles from Off-peak to on-peak.

My last bill: electricity cost made up 68% of the bill. Delivery was about 19%. 2% regulatory charge. The rest was taxes.

There is a lot of noise in the bill, but the actual cost of the electricity is still about 2/3 of my entire bill, so TOU is important.


----------



## Zipper (Nov 18, 2015)

The Zippers London Bill.

Electricity $121
Delivery $45
HST $22
Regulatory $4

On Peak $35.93
Mid Peak $29.99 
Off Peak $55.37

Delivery $44.20 37%
Regulatory 3.99 3%
HST $22.04 18%


----------



## Brian K (Jan 29, 2011)

Zipper - how many KWhr's is that bill for? I know you have On/Mid/Off which makes an overall cost not as meaningful but just curious.

Gas Hot water tank cost. I replaced my 40 gallon NG tank when it failed for $600. 

Heat Pump Op cost assumption. I have a condo in Sicamous that has a combo heat pump/furnace/AC unit. The heat pump produces heat until the outside air temp drops below -5C then switches to electric heating elements. Then in the summer, it operates as an A/C unit. It's a nice compact unit. When we are gone (all winter) we turn the temp down to 10 C. Heating costs are pretty cheap but I have an inside unit so I'm guessing it doesn't run much. I must be mooching heat from the surrounding condos. My neighbour has an outside unit and he says his winter heating bill is ridiculous (he doesn't say how much and no temperature setpoint details but he is p!ssed) so I 'assumed' it isn't as cost effective as NG which isn't available in Sicamous anyway. Also a big factor in heat pump cost effectiveness and ability to keep you warm is the ambient temp where you live and if you require the electric elements to kick in or not because then it becomes an electric furnace and not a heat pump.

In Alberta, as far as using electricity over NG and thinking we're saving emissions, most of our electricity is generated by NG so having electric appliances just moves the emissions somewhere else and then there are the power line losses versus hopefully no NG line losses unless the pipes leak. Also, as I mentioned previously, I have an app that says 1GJ = 277 KW. 1GJ cost me ~$8.00 delivered and 277 kw * $0.20/KWhr costs $55. So based on that NG is almost 7 times cheaper for an equivalent amount of energy - but that is in Alberta.


----------



## Zipper (Nov 18, 2015)

On Peak 172.75 kWh @$0.208/kW

Mid Peak 208.29 kWh @$0.144/kWh

Off Peak 548.25 kWh @$0.101/kWh


----------



## Zipper (Nov 18, 2015)

ltr your $75.00 a year hot water heating bill seems awfully light to me.

Do you have a dishwasher or do you do dishes in the sink? Do you take showers and baths?

Do you do laundry? Some loads would have to use warm or hot water?

Man that's only $0.20 a day.


----------



## Brian K (Jan 29, 2011)

Zipper said:


> The Zippers London Bill.
> 
> Electricity $121
> Delivery $45
> ...


I'm a little confused - Is the bill total $121 or ($121+45+4+22)=192?


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

Zipper said:


> ltr your $75.00 a year hot water heating bill seems awfully light to me.
> 
> Do you have a dishwasher? Do you take showers and baths?
> 
> Do you do laundry? Some would have to use warm or hot?


The $75 is the electricity cost that doesn't include delivery, customer charges etc, but gas also has those costs. As I said, the electric water heater uses about 3200 watts a night at the low rate of $0.065, and then is shut off until the next night. That's about $75 a year. Water lasts all day, no problem. It's just me. There's still lots of water left by night time though.

I remember the last time I installed a new water heater I did a really detailed analysis of perhaps switching to a gas water heater from electric and the breakeven date from the calculations was something like 23 years, so that doesn't justify making the switch. 

Also consider that new high efficiency gas water heaters also use electricity for the fan. And don't discount that eventually the carbon tax on the gas bill will grow and grow. No carbon tax on electricity.

In fact, there may come a time when they won't allow people to use gas/oil furnaces, water heaters etc.... It will all be electric.

ltr


----------



## Zipper (Nov 18, 2015)

Sorry Brian.

Total electric charge is indeed $192. There is an Ontario Electricity Rebate of $53.90 bringing the figure down to $138.10.

And then there is the water charge of $55.86 bringing both utilities to $193.96.

My actual water usage is $4.50 for 9.00 m3 and $4.00 wastewater charge and get this........... $47.36 Infrastructure Connection Surcharge.


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

Zipper said:


> On Peak 172.75 kWh @$0.208/kW
> 
> Mid Peak 208.29 kWh @$0.144/kWh
> 
> Off Peak 548.25 kWh @$0.101/kWh


I believe this verifies that TOU is an important factor in your bill amount. You used three times as much electricity from on peak to off peak, yet only paid $20 more for your off peak usage.


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

Zipper said:


> ltr your $75.00 a year hot water heating bill seems awfully light to me.
> 
> Do you have a dishwasher or do you do dishes in the sink? Do you take showers and baths?
> 
> ...


Time to pull out the water bill. I’m always curious as to other people’s water usage. I pay about $2000 a year for water. Only about 20% of the homes in my town are on municipal water, so we end up paying a fair chunk for the infrastructure. Don’t have my usage handy, but I recall it was average for a family of four.


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

like_to_retire said:


> The $75 is the electricity cost that doesn't include delivery, customer charges etc, but gas also has those costs. As I said, the electric water heater uses about 3200 watts a night at the low rate of $0.065, and then is shut off until the next night. That's about $75 a year. Water lasts all day, no problem. It's just me. There's still lots of water left by night time though.
> 
> I remember the last time I installed a new water heater I did a really detailed analysis of perhaps switching to a gas water heater from electric and the breakeven date from the calculations was something like 23 years, so that doesn't justify making the switch.
> 
> ...


There are heat pump water heaters that are probably the most efficient. Probably not great for Canada but awesome in warmer climates. They pull Air from the surrounding area and heat the water. In the souther us, water heaters are often in the garage. Super efficient heating water when the ambient temp is 30C. In Canada, they’re not as great. They will make the room the heater is in feel a bit cooler and the temperature of the supply water is much colder in Canada, resulting a huge temp lift required. All that being said, I think with natural efficicnes and improvements, the heat pump water heater will be the go-to solution in 10 years.


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

I'm starting to see articles like below quite often now.

I'm afraid the days of gas water heaters and gas furnaces are coming to an end.

Goodbye, gas furnaces? Why electrification is the future of home heating.

Cities are banning natural gas in new homes, citing climate change.

ltr


----------



## birdman (Feb 12, 2013)

What I fail to understand is why, at least in my area, is natural gas is so reasonable compared to electricity. As I mentioned above we save over $1,000. PA and reduced our annual energy costs from $3600. PA to $2,400. PA after we switched from an electric furnace to gas. We also have an excellent heat pump which we now only use as an air conditioner. With climate change why doesn't the government simply reduce electricity charges and tax the hec out of natural gas?


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

frase said:


> ....why doesn't the government simply reduce electricity charges and tax the hec out of natural gas?


Isn't that the theory behind the carbon tax?

ltr


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

frase said:


> With climate change why doesn't the government simply reduce electricity charges and tax the hec out of natural gas?


They started the ball rolling with the carbon tax but it has to be done slowly over time. A massive switch couldn't be handled, either by the numbers of installations and/or likely the electrical grid in all areas. Also not all electricity in Canada is "green", some coal/gas/etc is still being used. There are numerous other factors as well.


----------



## Brian K (Jan 29, 2011)

Zip - thanks for the Total and the rebate info. So your average is $0.15/KWhr with the rebate. You're lucky you have time of use billing. That suggests the grid is getting maxed out in the daytime therefore they are trying to push consumption to the shoulder times. Now imagine what happens when people are forced to go to electric heat/hot water and plugging in cars. As long as you heat you heat your house at night, that might work but not so much for a say at home person but most people turn the heat down at night. Same as showering in the morning then reheat the water during high usage billing. I guess you could put a timer on the 240 VAC electric hot water tank. Time to shower before bed - but showers wake me up! LED lights saved the grid by using about 10-15% % of what incandescent used - the biggest energy saver yet. I prefer what I hear they do in California. They have a 3 tiered system too but they have the (numbers guesses but you get the gist) are 1st 500 KWhrs for fairly cheap, the 2nd usage tranch from 500-750 more $$, then over 750KWhrs a high price. To me that is the best system because you are penalized for heavy usage - say adding a hot tub or some other high use appliance but penalizing for basic consumption.

Ahh water bills. Last year I used 78 M3 of water. Cost was $931 so about $12/M3. But as usual the devil is in the details. Last month:

Water - 6.0 M3 @ $1.599 = $9.60 plus Fixed charge of 12.80 = $22.40 * 1.05 (GST) = $23.52
Sewer - 6.0 M3 * .90 @ $1.6278/M3 = $8.79 plus fixed charge of $22.16 = $30.95 * 1.05 = $32.50
Stormwater Fixed charge of $12.86 * 1.05 = $13.50

The Total for 6.0M3 is $69.52 or $11.59/M3. But the variable charge is $18.39 *1.05 = $19.31 or $3.21/M3 or $0.00321 cents per liter; Fixed charge of $50.21 
So not much incentive to cut back on water usage with the joy of $50 just to be connected and 2 cents to flush a toilet. 
I see in Ottawa they also charge for Firewater. Better not tell the Calgary bean counter they can add this too!


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

I think the reasoning is that they have some control over the fossil fuels used in creating electricity, with the eventual goal in mind to eliminate any fossil fuels in its production. Presently in Ontario for example, electricity is about 54% nuclear and 26% hydro. So that last 20% is made up of natural gas, wind wind and solar. If they eventually eliminate the gas, then electricity would be 100% non emitting of carbon dioxide or other greenhouse gases. 

Adding carbon tax to utility bills that use gas is just the start. They look to ramp up the amount charges. They already have in leaps and bounds. When they started charging carbon tax on my gas bill last September it was $0.04. I remember seeing it and thought is was silly. Then Oct = $2.31, Nov = $8.49, Dec= $13.92, and this Jan = $17.21. I can see where this is headed and it certainly doesn't encourage me to put a new gas appliance into my home.

ltr


----------



## birdman (Feb 12, 2013)

Thx and never paid much attention to my bill. For the 30 days ending Jan 17th my gas bill was 177.00 which included 32.00 in Carbon tax!


----------



## Brian K (Jan 29, 2011)

Saying you can reduce NG generation sounds great if you have enough Nukes, Hydro, Solar and Wind, but try to build a new Nuke or build a Hydro dam these days. Look at all the complaining about bird kills and sound effects driving people nuts in Southern Ontario from wind mills. And no power at night using solar and no power when the wind doesn't blow. Heat your house then! In BC, they are building I think it is called Site C Hydro dam on the Peace River, and everyone is up in arms about the enviro damage. All the existing dams in BC were build by the Americans to control water going to the US. No one would allow that to be built today but BC is proud of their Hydro production -for good reason. The Revelstoke dam is build on a geological fault and is upstream of Revelstoke. Wait for the earthquake! Bruce Nuclear also tried to build a Nuke in Alberta to power the Oil sands a few years ago and that was doomed because no one wants in a Nuke in their back yard. What about the waste? Send it to the sun or lets just bury it. Are Nukes safe? Remember the recent alarm from Pickering. Sorry - I wouldn't want to live downwind of that place. In the 80's I went up to James Bay to do some work. The enviro damage caused by all the gorges and spillways 300 feet across and 100 feet deep cut into the land, pristine land and trees flooded was bloody awful but nobody talks about that now - except how green Quebec is. I doubt if the Caribou can read the sign that says "Danger Cliff". There is so much water there now it changed the weather in Labrador but who cares - it's up north. And of course Hydro Quebec didn't bother to ask the Natives for any permission either. They relocated them and just give them money to shutup. Try that now. In BC they can't get permission to change their mind without asking and consulting with the natives. We're a BANANA republic - Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything!
I'm all for cleaning up and not polluting but can't they scrub the exhaust or plant some trees. Oh wait we have lots of trees now but we can't count that to offset our Carbon usage. 
Isn't the bigger problem China and the Developing Countries mega coal burning in all the new power plants they are building - and BC is the largest exported of Coal to China. Stop mining that coal! Carbon tax that when it is mined. But burning it somewhere else makes it exempt - moving the emissions somewhere else makes it OK. Oh that would kill some jobs in BC so Horgan won't do that. They are trying to build a Coastal Gaslink pipeline to take NG to the West Coast to sell it to China but many are against that too. So we have a Gov't that is Carbon taxing us and GST'ing that too. Revenue for an out of control spending problem and diverting our attention by making the tax grab about something we can feel good about.


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

Brian K said:


> Zip - thanks for the Total and the rebate info. So your average is $0.15/KWhr with the rebate. You're lucky you have time of use billing. That suggests the grid is getting maxed out in the daytime therefore they are trying to push consumption to the shoulder times. Now imagine what happens when people are forced to go to electric heat/hot water and plugging in cars. As long as you heat you heat your house at night, that might work but not so much for a say at home person but most people turn the heat down at night. Same as showering in the morning then reheat the water during high usage billing. I guess you could put a timer on the 240 VAC electric hot water tank. Time to shower before bed - but showers wake me up! LED lights saved the grid by using about 10-15% % of what incandescent used - the biggest energy saver yet. I prefer what I hear they do in California. They have a 3 tiered system too but they have the (numbers guesses but you get the gist) are 1st 500 KWhrs for fairly cheap, the 2nd usage tranch from 500-750 more $$, then over 750KWhrs a high price. To me that is the best system because you are penalized for heavy usage - say adding a hot tub or some other high use appliance but penalizing for basic consumption.


Not sure tiered would work either. I used almost 4000 kWh last month. Heat pump with electric aux backup. I looked into converting to a propane furnace but the cost was between 6-$10,000. At current prices, propane is marginally cheaper, though there’s greater risk, greater maintenance and greater inconvenience of fill ups.

General consensus with a heat pump is to NOT to turn it lower at night. You’re likely then forcing the aux to come on in the morning to bring the temp back up.


----------



## Mortgage u/w (Feb 6, 2014)

Y'all should move to QC. Hydro costs between $0.06-$0.09/KWhr!


----------



## Brian K (Jan 29, 2011)

Mortgage u/w said:


> Y'all should move to QC. Hydro costs between $0.06-$0.09/KWhr!


And Hydro Quebec is screwing the Newf's for power generated at Churchill Falls. I think they are paying 1 cent per KWhr. 


4000 kwhrs per month!!!! At the $0.20/KWhr I pay that would cost $800 per month. I think it would be time to move to Mexico! Which even now looks more and more attractive.


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

Brian K said:


> And Hydro Quebec is screwing the Newf's for power generated at Churchill Falls. I think they are paying 1 cent per KWhr.
> 
> 
> 4000 kwhrs per month!!!! At the $0.20/KWhr I pay that would cost $800 per month. I think it would be time to move to Mexico! Which even now looks more and more attractive.


I’m at about $0.13 kwhr. Switched to equal billing last year. Comes in at $275 a month.


----------



## prisoner24601 (May 27, 2018)

Money172375 said:


> There are heat pump water heaters that are probably the most efficient. Probably not great for Canada but awesome in warmer climates. They pull Air from the surrounding area and heat the water. In the souther us, water heaters are often in the garage. Super efficient heating water when the ambient temp is 30C. In Canada, they’re not as great. They will make the room the heater is in feel a bit cooler and the temperature of the supply water is much colder in Canada, resulting a huge temp lift required. All that being said, I think with natural efficicnes and improvements, the heat pump water heater will be the go-to solution in 10 years.


I use a heat pump water heater along with a drain water heat recovery pipe to raise the temperature of the supply water. Works great although as you say, the temperature in the basement utility room drops about 5degrees while it's heating. Best place to be in the summer but wear slippers and a sweater in the winter. My dryer is a full size heat pump ventless dryer. All of this is pretty standard in passive house builds


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

frase said:


> Thx and never paid much attention to my bill. For the 30 days ending Jan 17th my gas bill was 177.00 which included 32.00 in Carbon tax!


Yeah, most people don't look at their bills, but if they did, they might not be so gung-ho about this carbon tax. I see otherwise intelligent people on this forum saying how they support the carbon tax, and I just don't get it. Nothing will be accomplished other than supplying the government coffers. Kudos to the Liberals for convincing the masses.

It's hard to know how much they'll eventually confiscate in carbon taxes on your gas bill, but as of today, with my utility, the rate is 3.91 cents per cubic meter . That has increased exponentially since it was started in September 2019. My gas supply rate 9.3487 cents per cubic meter, so today the confiscation tax for carbon is 41.8% of gas used. It will continue to increase until no one will ask the question why anyone would install an electric water heater instead of a gas heater.

This tax, is designed to be an incentive to force people to _"modify behavior"_ and switch to electric. The trouble in Canada is that we're a bit of a captive audience since we would die if we didn't heat our homes. They are attempting to force us to switch to electric in our homes for furnaces, water heaters, dryers, yet the cost of electricity is prohibitively high in many cases.

ltr


----------



## BC Eddie (Feb 2, 2014)

You may not believe in the science but most informed people due - heck it took a while before most people believed the earth was not flat.

A carbon tax was not designed to just convince people to switch to electric. It is intended to raise the cost of energy so we are less inclined to waste it. Many places in the world need to heat their homes and they do this with much more expensive fuel than we have to pay. But they are much more energy efficient than North America.


----------



## Jericho (Dec 23, 2011)

BC Eddie said:


> You may not believe in the science but most informed people due - heck it took a while before most people believed the earth was not flat.
> 
> A carbon tax was not designed to just convince people to switch to electric. It is intended to raise the cost of energy so we are less inclined to waste it. Many places in the world need to heat their homes and they do this with much more expensive fuel than we have to pay. But they are much more energy efficient than North America.


The problem is, many of us are doing our best not to waste anyway. In reality, not theory, many folks don't waste because they cannot afford to. The economy in Canada is not good. Years of overspending and handouts and stale job creation is wreaking havoc on some provinces.

I've taken it upon myself to outfit my home with LED lighting, a smart thermostat, etc and am conscious about my energy output. However everything I have to do - I do for a reason - because I need to. I need to drive to work. I got rid of my truck and got a fuel efficient vehicle. My vehicle has a 1.6 litre 4 cylinder engine and it's on eco-mode. (electricity isn't clean enough to convince me a change to an electric car will reduce emissions). Also, I even dry my clothes manually most of the time so I don't use my dryer.

I need to turn on lights in the evening. I need to heat my home. I don't go beyond what's NEEDED, but it's still needed. I've been this way before the carbon tax and have been this way after the carbon tax. 

My conclusion? The carbon tax is just that - a tax. It taxes me to use the things I NEED to use. I pay more. I don't pollute less as a result of the tax. Most of my friends are in the same boat as I am. They simply pay more, not polluting less.

I believe in science. I believe that we impact the earth. However forcing me to pay more money (I'm not eligible for a rebate due to my income) is NOT going to affect my output. Retailers just add the cost onto goods. Many of these goods are necessities. The consumer (me) is stuck with the increased cost of goods too. Now we've made it even more expensive to live.

*The carbon tax is a failure.* 

On topic:

As for the OP, I've used a Nest thermostat on my furnace and since adding it, I've noticed a HUGE reduction in my gas bill. If your current furnace isn't breaking the bank, I'd just add a smart thermostat and be mindful of things and you'll be ok. (in addition to ensuring your smoke/carbon monoxide detectors are up to date). Unless you've cash to throw around, I'd keep your current furnace for a while longer if you're responsible with it's use.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

I was going to recommend a Nest or Ecobee thermostat as well

My state subsidizes smart thermostats and LEDs etc and I got a Nest for $35. It sets eco mode automatically when I leave/return and it does some other neat things based on sun/weather, humidity, and apparently even state data.

At that price I might try the Ecobee next year just to compare. My only complaint with Nest is it doesn't integrate with Apple homekit since it's google

You can't declare carbon tax a failure based on yourself. People respond to economic incentive and we'll need the overall data to see if it's high enough for people who do waste to adjust.

Canadian usage per capita is some of the highest in the world and it isn't just the climate. Homes are designed much more efficiently in Europe and lifestyles adjusted due to the costs.

Need is very subjective.


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

I haven’t kept up to date on what smart thermostats can do.

We have a hp with electric aux. I’ve read that we should not set it back at night.

What exactly do the new generation thermostats offer that the old ones didn’t, besides remote functionality? My existing unit has an outside temp sensor already, to help the hp decide on modes.

The ability to set morning, day, eve, night schedules has been around for years.

Any insights which might bring heating costs down? Home is occupied 24 hrs/day.


----------



## birdman (Feb 12, 2013)

Annual Gas and Electricity costs:
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
$2,992. 3,092. 3,592. 3,550. 2,403.

2015 to Dec 15/18 house was heated with top of the line heat pump with electric back up (No gas to our house)
Had gas installed and purchased top of the line gas furnace in December 2018. 
Use the heat pump only in the summer as an air conditioner
2100 sq ft home with w/o bsmt of same size for 4000 + sq ft
House built in 1981. Original windows but have R54 insulation in ceiling.
Most lights are LED's. Only 2 of us in the house but still have lots of laundry and mostly use the drier
Live in the Okanagan area of BC. Cooler winters and hot summers.
Have monthly breakdown of gas and electric bills going back years but don't know how to attach here. PM if additional details wanted.
New furnace is modulating. Very efficient and you virtually never hear it running. The fan speed & heat vary depending on what demand is put on it.
Smart Thermostats:
Allow you to control all operations on your phone
Set vacation schedule and reduce demand while away. Again, you can also control and check this on your phone.
Tracks your energy use daily, weekly, monthly both in useage and costs
Zoning features available
Sensor to lower temperature when absent from your home (we don't use it)
Again, when it comes on it is only at a low level which maintains maximum efficiency. This is the best feature.
Shows the heat source, weather, outside temperature
Reminds you for service checks, filter changes, etc.
Humidity control settings
Allows you to set it back at night and again, you don't hear it running as it just comes on a bit when heat is required.
Some other minor stuff

I know the gas furnace is not as environmentally friendly as electricity but the latter is just too expensive. Also, the furnace hardly comes on and in the cold months our heat pump could keep up quite well but was constantly running. Really glad we changed and a much nicer heat with no noise and temperature can come up quickly compared to the heat pump. Again, PM me if additional info wanted.


----------



## birdman (Feb 12, 2013)

https://www.bryant.com/en/us/products/controls-thermostats/t6-wem01-a/

The above is the link to my thermostat and shows what it does better than my explanation above.


----------



## birdman (Feb 12, 2013)

https://evergreenhomeheatingandenergy.com/blog/146142

Another article on gas vs electric heat which may be worth a read. Thats it for my posts this am.


----------



## Jericho (Dec 23, 2011)

m3s said:


> I was going to recommend a Nest or Ecobee thermostat as well
> 
> My state subsidizes smart thermostats and LEDs etc and I got a Nest for $35. It sets eco mode automatically when I leave/return and it does some other neat things based on sun/weather, humidity, and apparently even state data.
> 
> ...


A need is essential, so I would argue it isn't very subjective at all.

And I don't need a mechanic to tell me my car isn't starting. I can look at it and tell it isn't starting. I can look around me and see that it's status quo with the carbon tax. People simply pay more. And it's wealth redistribution rewards for those who aren't as successful as others, leaves something to question as well. We can agree to disagree, but my bank account simply loses more. We don't pollute less.

Since Trudeau's first election, our country (Canada) has been hemorrhaging billions. Rather than hitting Canadians with more tax, why not redirect a lot of the handouts to help equip and educate citizens on being environmentally friendly. (for instance, he just gave Mastercard {yes, mastercard} 50 million toward a new building)

I think regardless of modern vs 80's furnace, OP should get a smart thermostat. There'll be savings all around. My furnace is a 2018 model and I've noticed huge savings before and after the Nest. I can see Nest being an issue if like m3s, you use Apple products, but my home is an Apple-free home. I don't support the company, it's locked down hardware and practices (but that's an opinion for another time and topic). The Nest works great with our Google Home setup and it's nice being able to monitor your home from away as well.

And maybe draw some comparisons between the two and see if the savings will be worth it.


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

Jericho said:


> I think regardless of modern vs 80's furnace, OP should get a smart thermostat. There'll be savings all around. My furnace is a 2018 model and I've noticed huge savings before and after the Nest.


A smart thermostat might help...but if someone already turns down the temp at night or when they go out then the savings will be minimal or non-existent. If you never did that before you would see savings. But your furnace burns the same amount of fuel regardless of which thermostat is attached...the only savings come from adjusting the temperature.

A Nest that predicts the schedule wouldn't work in my case because my schedule is too erratic to be pinned down. For me, a basic Wi-Fi thermostat works best. I turn the temp down at night or when I go out and then bump it up in the morning from bed with my phone. If I'm out then I can adjust the temp on the way home.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

Prairie Guy said:


> A Nest that predicts the schedule wouldn't work in my case because my schedule is too erratic to be pinned down. For me, a basic Wi-Fi thermostat works best. I turn the temp down at night or when I go out and then bump it up in the morning from bed with my phone. If I'm out then I can adjust the temp on the way home.


I'm working an erratic schedule and Nest still works without the learning schedule. Home/away assist uses the thermostat presence sensor and/or your phone to detect when you leave and come home. I do manually program the heat to come on before I wake up. It apparently also controls the fan manually to spread heat/cool air.

It knows for example when direct sun will heat up the house, humidity inside and out, and average state data and learns how much energy/time the house heats/cools with these variations. It adjusted my settings a bit after awhile. Nothing cosmic that I noticed so far

I have some other smart home devices and apps that work well with siri shortcuts. For example when I say 'siri good day/evening/morning' it sets a scene based on shortcuts. Nest being google won't integrate with home kit this well but ecobee does. For example I would set a shortcut to set eco mode for 7 hrs when I say 'siri, good night'

Home/away assist is the most useful feature because it's one less thing I have to remember when leaving and it's been reliable. Also the house starts heating before I get in which is just nice. Probably not worth the extra price tag but luckily I got it subsidized by the state and it's neat to try - might sell it and get ecobee next black friday



Jericho said:


> I think regardless of modern vs 80's furnace, OP should get a smart thermostat. There'll be savings all around. My furnace is a 2018 model and I've noticed huge savings before and after the Nest. I can see Nest being an issue if like m3s, you use Apple products, but my home is an Apple-free home. I don't support the company, it's locked down hardware and practices (but that's an opinion for another time and topic). The Nest works great with our Google Home setup and it's nice being able to monitor your home from away as well.


Apparently Nest worked with Apple homekit before Google bought it. So it is more google locking out than Apple.

When Apple locks down hardware it is annoying but it is often to improve security and privacy, which is important for a smart home.

I prefer a lot of Google software even if they harvest data so ideally they would play nice together


----------



## BC Eddie (Feb 2, 2014)

Money172375 said:


> We have a hp with electric aux. I’ve read that we should not set it back at night.


I have a Heatpump and I use a setback thermostat. But my furnace/blower unit has two switches; one to shut off power to the fan and a second to shut off power to the heating coil (i,e, auxiliary heating).

Where I live on Vancouver Island I have switched off the heating coil so I can use the setback to lower the temp and night and then bring it back up in the morning without using aux heat. Yes it takes longer to get back up but we don't mind and since I started to do this about three years ago our overall power usage has gone down.

Of course this would probably not be acceptable in areas of the country where winter nighttime temps are severe.


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

m3s said:


> It knows for example when direct sun will heat up the house, humidity inside and out, and average state data and learns how much energy/time the house heats/cools with these variations. It adjusted my settings a bit after awhile.


Huh, interesting stuff, I didn't know there was such sophistication in the NEST type thermostats. I do think there is merit in what Prairie Guy said, in that, "_your furnace burns the same amount of fuel regardless of which thermostat is attached...the only savings come from adjusting the temperature."_, but perhaps precise control of the temperature can offer good results if you own one of the newer variable/multi-speed furnaces or especially the latest modulating furnace where both fan speed and the amount of fuel burned adjusts incrementally.

I think it's safe to say that a standard single stage or even a dual stage furnace won't get much from installing a NEST type thermostat other than all the cool on-line features. I can't see much savings in energy compared to a standard old programmable thermostat that just about everyone has today.

I was visiting an old friend of mine the other day and he's quite set in his ways (unlike me of course), and I noticed the old circular mercury switch thermostat on the wall. I said, "dude, why don't you have a programmable thermostat?". He says, "I turn it down when I go to bed, and then turn it back up when I get up. Why would I want a programmable thermostat?"

Why indeed.....

ltr


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

Yea I'm renting and this house had those ancient circular mercury switches! Those switches don't even use the common wire for power, but luckily the electrician ran a common wire anyways. I had to trace it down to the furnace and connect it though. $250 would be hard to justify for a Nest/Ecobee but again they are heavily subsidized in my state along with LED bulbs etc

Besides saving money though I find the smart thermostats are more comfortable. The old switches modulate slower so the temp swings up and down slower. The new smart thermostats come with little sensors to put closer to where you sit. With the Nest it also has presence sensor so if you have multi zones you don't need to heat empty rooms as much

I think most Canadians would count themselves extremely lucky if they saw the cost of utilities in Europe and US. For example the state I'm in now I'm paying like 35 cents CAD per kWh! No carbon tax but it's about 50/50 distribution/generation and some minuscule energy efficiency charges. In Canada I was paying like 4 cents and my bill barely changed even if I unplugged everything and left for months at a time.

Electricity is averaged 0.2563 USD per kWh or about 0.35 CAD per kWh!!
Generation Service Charge kWh X .12941
Distribution Charge kWh X .06460
Transition Charge kWh X -.00013
Transmission Charge kWh X .02692
Revenue Decoupling Charge kWh X .00052
Distributed Solar Charge kWh X .00166
Renewable Energy Charge kWh X .00050
Energy Efficiency kWh X .02378


Gas is about $1.35 USD per therm or $1.80 CAD and I stayed in the lower bracket under 190 therms
First 190 therms .4424
Distribution first 190 therms .20210
Gas supply .60310/term

At these prices, and considering there is more sunlight in the winter months solar starts to make a lot more sense (and cents?) at lower latitudes


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

m3s said:


> Besides saving money though I find the smart thermostats are more comfortable. The old switches modulate slower so the temp swings up and down slower. The new smart thermostats come with little sensors to put closer to where you sit. With the Nest it also has presence sensor so if you have multi zones you don't need to heat empty rooms as much


That would work well for electric heating but not useful for gas/forced air systems.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

Yea I suppose it can't fire and distribute air that fast

Last house had radiant heated floors and that was just amazing compared to forced air or baseboard. I wonder if there's a gas heated water that could rotate hot water around the floors.. or geothermal

I've heard good things about heat pumps


----------



## Jericho (Dec 23, 2011)

m3s said:


> I'm working an erratic schedule and Nest still works without the learning schedule. Home/away assist uses the thermostat presence sensor and/or your phone to detect when you leave and come home. I do manually program the heat to come on before I wake up. It apparently also controls the fan manually to spread heat/cool air.
> 
> It knows for example when direct sun will heat up the house, humidity inside and out, and average state data and learns how much energy/time the house heats/cools with these variations. It adjusted my settings a bit after awhile. Nothing cosmic that I noticed so far
> 
> ...


Apple is notorious for locking down all their devices and forcing updates that make your devices so sluggish that you've no choice but to replace them. I've found the opposite to be true with Android/Google OS +. From my understanding, Apple refused to allow a lot of their products to be used through Google Home. After having a friend let me see the light, I ditched all things Apple and haven't looked back. It's quite nice to plug my non Apple device into my computer and immediately begin browsing the directories, instead of having to use iTunes etc.

As far as heating goes, I've noticed a huge difference with my Nest thermostat and my forced air natural gas furnace (and my AC unit). I've had considerable savings from before and after. Before, I used (while new) an older type thermostat that took 2 AA batteries. The Nest saves me a ton and is definitely worth the coin IMHO.


----------



## Brian K (Jan 29, 2011)

I use a Honeywell wifi thermostat and have used other programmable thermostats for many years. I like the Honeywell because they have a feature called 'Smart Response Technology" so that when I set the morning temp setpoint to 7:00 am, the furnace comes on earlier so that the house temp gets to the setpoint at 7:00 - not start at 7:00. The rest of the transition points activate at the programmed time as expected so when I go to bed at say 10:00 pm, the setpoint drops at 10:00. Also I love the fact I can see and adjust the temp from my phone. I have one at my cottage and normally keep the temp at 7 when I'm not there and turn it up a few hours before I get there. Just one of the features that make me appreciate all the wifi stuff. And when out of the country, I can see the temp so I feel more comfortable in not having the house checked every few days to see if the heat is on. Of course I shut the water off before I go too so no water leaks.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

So for the past week I've been checking the difference between fixed temperature for 24 hours vs dropping it overnight by 1.5c for 6 hours. 

On the coldest night the furnace was off for 169 mins and took 52 minutes to recover in the morning (117 burn mins saved).
On a warmer winter day the furnace was off for 200 mins and took 51 minutes to recover (149 burn mins saved).
I'm sure there are some additional savings during the low set temperature times to add to above.

I'll run this setting for another week then drop it to 2c lower overnight to compare.


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

cainvest said:


> So for the past week I've been checking the difference between fixed temperature for 24 hours vs dropping it overnight by 1.5c for 6 hours.
> 
> On the coldest night the furnace was off for 169 mins and took 52 minutes to recover in the morning (117 burn mins saved).
> On a warmer winter day the furnace was off for 200 mins and took 51 minutes to recover (149 burn mins saved).
> ...


Interesting. I do notice (no tests to back it up) if I drop the temperature overnight too much (i.e. 3 degrees), then it seems to take forever to get it back up to the daytime setting. So then I compensate by backing up the start time, which makes me question if I'm really saving much. 

I'll be interested to see what your further tests show.

ltr


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

General rule is you save 1% for every 1 degree f lower per 8 hours. I go from 70 to 60f for up to 16hrs so that's potentially 20% saving (less in reality as I oversimplified, 1/3 zones only drops 5 degrees f for 8 hrs at night)

I suspect the savings are not this linear though. The higher the differential between outside and in, and the insulation quality impact the rate of heat loss. So if it's colder outside or you like +70 inside or have poor insulation I suspect the savings are even higher

Like if you compare a hot water heater outside in the arctic set to 100 vs a hot water heater in a heated basement with a insulation wrap set to 80 the savings will not follow the same linear rule? Greater temp differential and heat loss = greater savings imo


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

like_to_retire said:


> Interesting. I do notice (no tests to back it up) if I drop the temperature overnight too much (i.e. 3 degrees), then it seems to take forever to get it back up to the daytime setting. So then I compensate by backing up the start time, which makes me question if I'm really saving much.
> 
> I'll be interested to see what your further tests show.
> 
> ltr


The first run when I switched to drop the temp at night I thought my data was bad as the furnace didn't run for 246 minutes (47min recovery) on a warmer day. After a few days I realized what was going on as I honestly didn't think it would stay off that long. As long as the off time is greater than the recovery time, and it has been by a significant margin, it's a win.

So the data I'm after here, see what kind of savings I'm getting and where the returns (time and temp) fall off. Of course this will be mostly applicable to my house and climate only but should close enough to ballpark a general guideline.


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

m3s said:


> General rule is you save 1% for every 1 degree f lower per 8 hours. I go from 70 to 60f for up to 16hrs so that's potentially 20% saving (less in reality as I oversimplified, 1/3 zones only drops 5 degrees f for 8 hrs at night)


I don't understand the 16 hours? I have my thermostat reduce the temperature back at 11PM and then set the program to have it back to my desired temperature at 8AM. Overall that's 9 hours, but the thermostat doesn't start heating at 8AM, rather it ensures the temperature is at the set point by 8AM, so depending on how far it has to go it may start at 6AM to accomplish that feat. This would only be a setback of 7 hours. What's with the 16 hours?

ltr


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

You'd get 16 hrs if you turn down the thermostat 8 hrs overnight and 8 hrs during the day when you're gone to school or work.


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

cainvest said:


> You'd get 16 hrs if you turn down the thermostat 8 hrs overnight and 8 hrs during the day when you're gone to school or work.


Ahhh, I guess I've been retired for so long that I never even thought. Sorry. makes sense for sure. I know when I use to work that setting the thermostat back made a big difference. They didn't have the fancy thermostats back then, so I just turned it back at night when I went to bed and suffered through a short time in the morning of cold and then when I returned home at 5PM I would turn the heat back on.

But, for us retired people, I question if the setback at night saves much.

ltr


----------



## fireseeker (Jul 24, 2017)

cainvest said:


> As long as the off time is greater than the recovery time, and it has been by a significant margin, it's a win.


Thanks for the sharing the results of your experiment. I'm interested in understanding how effective setbacks are.
I am confused by the the statement above. It seems to assume the furnace normally runs 50% of the time to maintain temperature. Is that right?


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

fireseeker said:


> Thanks for the sharing the results of your experiment. I'm interested in understanding how effective setbacks are.
> I am confused by the the statement above. It seems to assume the furnace normally runs 50% of the time to maintain temperature. Is that right?


Thanks for the question, the statement I made is indeed incorrect! On the plus side, it also jogged my memory about something I didn't consider ... more on this later.

So getting back to "as long as the off time is greater than the recovery time, and it has been by a significant margin, it's a win."

The proper statement should be "as long as sum of the normal on times during the off period are greater than the recovery time minus the sum of the normal recovery on times, it's win". That sounds right, I think. 

So if you were running at a 50% duty cycle (to keep things easy) and given my previous data of, "169 mins off time and 52 minutes to recover", you'd actually be saving (169/2 - (52/2)) or (84.5 - 26) for 58.5 mins of saved run time. That sounds better than 117 minutes I said before. You'll also likely save a bit more during the lower temp on/off cycles.

Back to the jogged memory ...
Just to complicate matters, I had to refer to the owners manual as I remember the sales guy trying to "up sell" me to a so called better "2 stage" thermostat but I just took the free one. Low and behold the furnace goes into the second stage heating (30% more gas usage) after running continuously for over 10 minutes and this is regardless of the thermostat used! Of course single stage furnaces don't have this issue.

Now the equation is for a dual stage furnace with a 50% duty cycle that runs longer than 10 minutes is ...
(169/2) - ((10/2) + ((42/2) x 1.30))) or 84.5 - 32.3 = 52.2 mins of saved run time.

I don't really need to go through these calculations as I can just compare the daily total "on times" but that dual stage burn kind of throws things off, think I'll have to compensate for that.


----------



## fireseeker (Jul 24, 2017)

I wonder what the typical duty cycle is. I imagine it to be much lower than 50%. 
And I presume shorter cycles mean less setback savings.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

fireseeker said:


> I wonder what the typical duty cycle is. I imagine it to be much lower than 50%.
> And I presume shorter cycles mean less setback savings.


Wouldn't that depend on the differential from outside/inside temps and the efficiency of insulation?

I'm wondering if the energy cost gets higher as the differential increases. I mean what is the setback saving from 23c to 21c vs 21c to 19c and then compare 15c outside vs -20c

I suspect the top few degrees are the most expensive especially when it extremely cold outside


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

Duty cycle will change depending on how fast the house cools off. Whether it be outside temperature or openning outside doors often, etc.
On the coldest days mine is close to 50%, warmer I've seen around 20%.
And yes, the less heat required the lower the savings.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

So based on the gas meter readings during the recovery burn this morning the second stage takes 33% more fuel. So to compensate for this I add 33% more "on time" into my daily percentage for the times when the second stage is used. This raised the coldest days by about 2%.

One interesting thing to see this morning was after the post-recovery heating the daily usage was only 22%. Normally this value would be in the mid 30's for this outside temperature. Guess one thing I could do is compare data only from 12:30am (before the temp drop) to 8:30am (post recovery) for fixed temp vs lowering it at night.

Looking over the daily data it's not easy to see the savings yet, the differences are not large and one can only compare days with similar outside temperatures.


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

cainvest said:


> ...... one can only compare days with similar outside temperatures.


Yeah, it's tough to run an accurate experiment when you're at the mercy of varying temperatures every day.

ltr


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

like_to_retire said:


> Yeah, it's tough to run an accurate experiment when you're at the mercy of varying temperatures every day.


Definitely, add to that the fact windchill also has to be accounted for to some degree, makes it tough to compare. I am collecting hourly data for both temp and windchill so that helps.


----------



## Brian K (Jan 29, 2011)

My thermostat turns the night temperature at 9:00 pm to 16 C, then by 7:30 it's back up to 20C for the day. I prefer a cool house to sleep in rather than a warmer house so turning the temp down isn't just for gas/power savings -it's for comfort - plus this encourages snuggle up time too and that is priceless (and yes sometimes costly LOL)


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

So for the past 3 days I changed the drop to 3c overnight and the results are more noticeable. Definitely some savings happening but still need to collect more data. Think I'll be changing it back to a 2c drop until it warms up a bit because with 3c it gets really cool near the walls below -25c outside temps.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

Ok, I finally have just enough data.
So I compared 30 days of steady temperature vs 30 days of deceasing overnight temperature for 7 hours. Mainly the overnight drop was 1.5c, a short period of 2c drop (6 days) and a few days (3) at a 3c drop.

The average outside temperature for both periods was -11.9c. I was able to match them as I had a few extra days of fixed temperature to choose from. I also adjusted the time (increased by 33%) during high burn second stage usage which mainly occurred during the warm up stage in the mornings but also happened, to a lesser degree, on some of the coldest nights.

And my savings for lowering the thermostat at night was .... 7%!

There definitely will be a margin of error here, many variables are outside my monitoring ability and control but I think it's a reasonable real world comparison.

I likely won't have any more comparison data as it's getting much warmer outside. So from this point forward I'll continue to drop the overnight temps by 1.5c or 2c for the savings.


----------



## agent99 (Sep 11, 2013)

Heat loss from a home is of course largely a function of the temperature difference between indoors and outdoors. It is also affected to quite a large extent by other factors. One is wind. Another is amount sunshine. My wife likes to keeptrsck of the performance of our heating system. She tracks energy usage against temperature difference and also logs wind velocity and hrs of sunshine. Not surprisingly energy usage on days with same temperature difference can vary considerably. This makes a study of effect of dropping temperature setting at night more difficult.

By the way, we installed a central high efficiency heat pump about 9 or 10 yrs ago (Mitsubishi Zuba). No backup heat used. It averages a COP of about 2.0 and even at -23C still maintains set temperature. At that point, COP is about 1.3. Still saving energy, but not as much. In Fall/Spring COP is in 3.0 range.

We do have gas available, but total installed cost of supply line, furnace room, furnace and separate A/C would have been about same as the heat pump. I forget energy cost comparison- gas vs 1/2 à much energy used by heat pump. Gas may have been cheaper, but not enough because we considered it safer and environmentally better to not use gas.


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

We have a heat pump too. Don’t know the performance figures. How would I find them for different temps as you’ve stated? Mine runs all night if it’s anywhere near zero, even with electrical backup as an option. Does your run a LOT? Our unit is about 11 years old. I’m tempted to turn off the electrical back up and see what it can do. My bill in feb is about $600. In central Ontario.


----------



## agent99 (Sep 11, 2013)

Money172375 said:


> We have a heat pump too. Don’t know the performance figures. How would I find them for different temps as you’ve stated? Mine runs all night if it’s anywhere near zero, even with electrical backup as an option. Does your run a LOT? Our unit is about 11 years old. I’m tempted to turn off the electrical back up and see what it can do. My bill in feb is about $600. In central Ontario.


Manufacturers have performance curves and data charts for their heat pumps. However, it is not simple to evaluate these things. Some perform better than others at different temperatures. You also need a heat loss curve for your home. So far as I know, only Mitsubishi had the new type of high efficiency units 11 years ago. Trane, Carrier and perhaps others may now have equally efficient units. Mitsubishi & Train apparently now have a joint venture to market high efficiency heat pumps. 

Example of Zuba data.: https://s3.amazonaws.com/greenbuild...bishi-Zuba-Central-3-Ton-Performace-Specs.pdf

Our unit of course runs more as the temperature outside drops. Never full time. More recently, we have avoided even being in Ontario Jan-March. We now now turn the heat pump off, turn breakers for a few of our old baseboard heaters on and set them at about 6C. That helps pay for our trips South  

Regarding cost, our total bill has been in the $400-$700 for a billing period that includes much of January. This includeds a separate part of our home that still has baseboard heat. If we were there full time, we would probably add a mini-split for that area. The Zuba is maxed out.


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

agent99 said:


> Manufacturers have performance curves and data charts for their heat pumps. However, it is not simple to evaluate these things. Some perform better than others at different temperatures. You also need a heat loss curve for your home. So far as I know, only Mitsubishi had the new type of high efficiency units 11 years ago. Trane, Carrier and perhaps others may now have equally efficient units. Mitsubishi & Train apparently now have a joint venture to market high efficiency heat pumps.
> 
> Example of Zuba data.: https://s3.amazonaws.com/greenbuild...bishi-Zuba-Central-3-Ton-Performace-Specs.pdf
> 
> ...


What kind of Min COP could you get by with to maintain a home at 22c? We get a lot of sun in the day so it runs very little. As sun as the sun goes down, it starts running. I dint set it back at night since I’ve been told/read that is counterproductive with a HP. I’ve yet to decide what to replace it with when the time comes.....a newer efficient HP with elec backup, heat pump with propane backup or full-on propane furnace. I suspect we will be spending at least half our winters down south by 2023.


----------



## agent99 (Sep 11, 2013)

It's not the cop that matters. You can keep the house at 22c with baseboard heaters. Essentially cop of 1.
What you need is a HP that
- is designed to run when outdoor temperatures are very low. 
- can produce more heat than your house loses under the chosen design conditions. For example 22c in/ -23c out. 
- maintains reasonably high cop even at lowest temperatures.

If the HP can't supply enough heat at lowest temperatures, then supplemental heat is needed.

Most units meeting above will also have sufficient A/C capacity

To choose a suitable HP or furnace, a heat loss calculation for house should be done. For furnaces, there are probably rules of thumb for sizing. HPs need more care when choosing


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

My unit is a Carrier 25HNA936A320. Rated at 19 seer. Air handler is FE4ANF005. Haven’t been able to find a chart yet like the Zumba that shows BTU, temps and COP.


----------



## agent99 (Sep 11, 2013)

I did a search for carrier 25hna and it brought up product data for that family of models. It included charts on which the house heat loss can be superimposed to find the balance point at various outdoor temperatures. It also had charts that include cop under different conditions.
I actually checked the Carrier units before going with the Mitsubishi
Main reason was performance at low temperatures. At higher temperatures Carrier was better. I talked to them back then, and the guy I spoke to said they were not suitable for stop/starting at low temperatures. Not sure if I was looking at your model, but the number does sound familiar.


----------



## Brian K (Jan 29, 2011)

CAINVEST figured a 7% savings by turning the thermostat back a night. That is a great number to hear (even if it is off by a bit for whatever reason) and will continue turning mine back from 20 to 15 at 9:00 pm and back up by 8:00 am. I actually like the cooler nights.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

Ya, 7% is pretty much in line with what others are saying, I think 15% for two daily drops (overnight/work day) is used a fair bit by the industry. I agree on cooler nights is nice for sleeping.


----------



## Brian K (Jan 29, 2011)

Well it was very informative (for me anyway) to see what cutting back the temp setpoint seems to be saving you so again - thanks for posting this after doing some data gathering.
My old furnace is working very well inspite of it's age and nicely kept the house warm during the -40 (C or F) we had in Alberta in Feb. And this morning it is -20. This winter has been like the energizer bunny! And in talking to my neighbours who have new furnaces, they don't really see that much savings apparently and occasionally have problems with their exhaust freezing up which shuts the furnace down when it gets really cold because the exhaust is mostly water vapor. But when it gets really cold - that is when you stress all systems. I wonder how Heat Pumps would work when it's this cold. Perhaps geothermal would be better when it's brass monkey weather - but you can't beat natural gas IMO.
We normally get most of our cold weather in the early part of the year (Jan-March) and most of our snow in March and April - but I would be remiss in not mentioning snow in the summer months too as my Eastern friends remind me when I visit Ottawa.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

Glad the info was helpful!

Not sure about your neighbor's savings, depends on how different their new vs old furnace efficiency compared. My old one was from 1960 so maybe 60% vs the new 93-95% so some definite savings there. If your furnace was newer, maybe in 80% range, the savings will be much less of course.

I have the sidewall intake/exhaust pipes and they never freeze up, even in Winterpeg!  
You do need to keep snow from piling up near the pipes, that can cause problems.

On the coldest days this winter (windchills values around -40c) my maximum duty cycle on time was 55%. Still had lots of heating room for even colder days which is good as windchill values below -50c do happen here.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

Just an update for this year's cold snap with minimum overnight temps below -30c and w/c in the -45c to -50c range.

Furnace duty cycle | mean daily temp | mean daily windchill

61% -28.15 -43.2
58% -30.27 -41.8
56% -29.17 -42.2
52% -25.42 -37.3
53% -27.89 -38.1
55% -30.01 -39.5
58% -31.47 -42.2

I found it interesting that on the days I went outside more often (open/closed the back door 4-5 times vs only twice) I could see the furnace working harder to recover. Even that short "cold blast" from the door being open caused the furnace to do more "high burn" cycle time.


----------



## gardner (Feb 13, 2014)

cainvest said:


> Furnace duty cycle


I am curious how you obtained the data. Is it something your thermostat collects and reports?


----------



## gardner (Feb 13, 2014)

I went to a good deal of trouble to capture the furnace performance data I wanted. I had to connect into the furnace control signals and put a temperature sensor inside the furnace plenum. It does get me interesting data. Here the pink lines are times when the thermostat is commanding heat. The height of the lines is the air temp in the plenum, with 50C at the top and 25C at the bottom. The temperature swings are due to the thermostat setting which is time-of-day/day-of-week dependent but varies between 16.5C and 19.5C.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

gardner said:


> I am curious how you obtained the data. Is it something your thermostat collects and reports?


I made a custom interface to the furnace. A raspberry pi collects the furnace data (on/off times) along with getting the hourly weather data from the web and inside temps from two probes at different locations in the house. The raw data from the raspberry pi is used to update a SQL database on a Windows machine for easy display and backup. I also calculate if the furnace uses the higher second stage burn as that uses 33% more gas during that period.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

gardner said:


> I went to a good deal of trouble to capture the furnace performance data I wanted. I had to connect into the furnace control signals and put a temperature sensor inside the furnace plenum. It does get me interesting data. Here the pink lines are times when the thermostat is commanding heat. The height of the lines is the air temp in the plenum, with 50C at the top and 25C at the bottom. The temperature swings are due to the thermostat setting which is time-of-day/day-of-week dependent but varies between 16.5C and 19.5C.
> 
> View attachment 21278


Cool!

What are you using to capture your data?


----------



## gardner (Feb 13, 2014)

The temp and humidity come from some ZWave multi-function sensors I have around the house. For the furnace data I have a little box powered by the furnace control circuit -- 24VAC -- that senses the heat/cool command lines via an opto isolator and picks up the plenum temp using a Dallas DS1820. The program is super simple and runs on an ATTINY85. It transmits the data every couple of minutes using a 433Mhz OOK radio like a wireless thermometer uses and I pick the data up on a real computer. I have some scripts to process the data and I use GNUPlot to generate the chart.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

The ATTINY85 is pretty neat, have to keep those in mind for future projects. They also have a cheap pi pico now that I need to take a look at though the pi zeros are already cheap enough. 

I use the same DS18B20 temp sensors. For some odd reason those didn't work below 0c degrees even though they are rated for -55c ... might have been a bad batch I guess.


----------



## gardner (Feb 13, 2014)

I was thinking of getting a couple of pi-pico boards to mess around with, but I started out as an Arduino guy and have lots of those around. I moved to the ATTINY for projects I wanted to cost < $10 in parts -- something that might have to live out in the rain or get broken or stolen. They are also ridiculously low power. I have a little box sending the water temperature from the swim raft at our cottage and it runs about 10 months on 3 AAs.


----------

