Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Nine US states are teaming up to accelerate the adoption of heat pumps

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 766 posts

Re: Nine US states are teaming up to accelerate the adoption of heat pumps

#121

Post by Detrytus »

herpdyderp wrote: post #5

The states listed are: - California - Colorado - Maine - Maryland - Massachusetts - New Jersey - New York - Oregon - Rhode Island

Why would anyone need a heat pump in California, given the climate there? I can understand north-eastern states, but not this. Is it a case of mindlessly jumping on "progressive" bandwagon?

EDIT: I actually spent one winter in San Diego, and apartments there don't even have any heating installed (except occasional fireplace in the living room). I know that more to the north it might get worse, but by how much?

Re: Nine US states are teaming up to accelerate the adoption of heat pumps

#122

Post by nsguy »

nostromo wrote: post #114

I have mixed feelings about our heat pump system. Yes, it's efficient. But it breaks about once every other year. Last winter the compressor circuit board malfunctioned and cost $5k to fix. Two years ago it was another issue entirely. All of our savings have been lost to service calls. I'm not super price sensitive, but it's still a pain when the heat goes out in the middle of winter and all the service techs are boo…

I got a TOSOT. So far so good.

Re: Nine US states are teaming up to accelerate the adoption of heat pumps

#123

Post by shadowpho »

nostrademons wrote: post #92

These states really need to get their electric rates down if they want to accelerate adoption of electrification technologies. We were planning to fully electrify our house + transportation in the next few years. PG&E rate hikes and net metering policies put the damper on that. It's now more expensive to fuel a vehicle with electricity than gas, so I'm charging my PHEV at work and using gas for the rest. We have sola…

> It's now more expensive to fuel a vehicle with electricity than gas

How is that possible? Even at 20c/kWh it's still a good 4x cost difference I though

Re: Nine US states are teaming up to accelerate the adoption of heat pumps

#124

Post by bluedino »

huytersd wrote: post #90
readingnews wrote: post #86

I just replaced a furnace... everyone I called for a quote would not touch a heat pump with a 20foot pole, or they wanted prices that were 2X what a separate furnace and AC would cost to install. It was very strange. This is the second home where I had this experience.. basically, they really did not want to install it. I ended up going with gas as no local person would install/warranty a heat pump, or, it was priced…

If you’re somewhat rural the contractors just don’t have the experience to do it so they try to quote you out of the decision. I had to shop around until I found a contractor that had done this before and I was able to get a whole home heat pump for about the same price as a regular furnace/AC system (because of the rebates).

> If you’re somewhat rural the contractors just don’t have the experience to do it so they try to quote you out of the decision.

Or they're so busy they can pick and choose their jobs. I had a quote to replace a 12 foot section of pipe come in at $700, not even two hours worth of work.

Re: Nine US states are teaming up to accelerate the adoption of heat pumps

#125

Post by lolinder »

ericd wrote: post #120
lolinder wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A heat pump is just an air conditioner that can be run in reverse. Replacing your air conditioner might help if it makes the noise because it's old and broken, but if you just really dislike the sound of an air conditioner it probably won't help much.

The variable speed inverter ones tend to be much quieter than the old single-stage ones that most people have, fwiw.

Ah, right! I actually have a variable stage regular AC unit, so that's not a benefit unique to heat pumps, that's something you can get by replacing your AC unit in general.

Re: Nine US states are teaming up to accelerate the adoption of heat pumps

#126

Post by bullfightonmars »

yellow_postit wrote: post #102

moved from oil furnace to heat pump in Seattle (with electric strip backup) Seems like a perfect fit for our weather patterns but was definitely not the most economical option as it kicked off a domino effect of upgrades I wasn't missing before. Its no where near as "cozy" as the oil heat was, and the temperature of airing coming from the vents is significantly lower than the oil system. So the domino of upgrades is…

I did the same this past thing, the best part about it is the reduction in cost for heating from 300+/mo to ~25/mo, The downside is that it was terribly expensive to install, it ran me 40k to install the new heat pump and air handler.

Re: Nine US states are teaming up to accelerate the adoption of heat pumps

#127

Post by jtbayly »

082349872349872 wrote: post #82
herpdyderp wrote: post #5

The states listed are: - California - Colorado - Maine - Maryland - Massachusetts - New Jersey - New York - Oregon - Rhode Island

representing ~1/3 of 2022 GDP (via https://www.bea.gov/sites/default/files/2023-12/stgdppi3q23.... )

I don't see how the GDP has anything to do with this.

What percent of the population those states make up might be somewhat interesting at least.

But even then, 90% of new installations requires us to know what percent of installations those states make up, and population isn't necessarily (but could be) a good corollary for that.

Re: Nine US states are teaming up to accelerate the adoption of heat pumps

#128

Post by hexis »

nostrademons wrote: post #119
subsubzero wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interestingly enough, That list of states besides Colorado and Maine all were the biggest losers of population in 2023, meaning people are leaving these states. - California -0.9 - Maryland -0.5 - Massachusetts -0.6 - New Jersey -0.5 - New York -1.1 - Oregon -0.1 - Rhode Island -0.3

Largely because that's the list of places where housing is super expensive: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_median_home_price #2 California $554K #3 Massachusetts $422K #5 Colorado. $397K #6 Oregon $361K #8 New Jersey $335K #9 New York $322K #10 Maryland $308K #13 Rhode Island $300K #25 Maine $242K And where income is highest: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_i…

"Nobody goes there anymore, it's too crowded"

Re: Nine US states are teaming up to accelerate the adoption of heat pumps

#129

Post by liminalsunset »

nostromo wrote: post #114

I have mixed feelings about our heat pump system. Yes, it's efficient. But it breaks about once every other year. Last winter the compressor circuit board malfunctioned and cost $5k to fix. Two years ago it was another issue entirely. All of our savings have been lost to service calls. I'm not super price sensitive, but it's still a pain when the heat goes out in the middle of winter and all the service techs are boo…

I'm wondering if many of the failures in electronically controlled equipment are due to power surges etc. It may be worth having a whole-home (or equipment specific) surge protective device installed, which will protect the power electronics (which have very minimal surge protection built in) from anything else happening on the line (particularly if there are storms where you live often)

Re: Nine US states are teaming up to accelerate the adoption of heat pumps

#130

Post by danans »

Tarrosion wrote: post #85
moribvndvs wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve had one for three years. While I generally love it, it cools too fast, which means it sucks at removing humidity, actually increases it a little. The installer over-provisioned.

I've heard this before -- that oversized cooling units (whether standalone AC or part of a heat pump) mean muggy interiors in the humid seasons. But...why? I'd think that a fixed amount of air compressed in the compressor means a fixed amount of condensation runoff from the unit, and it wouldn't matter much whether it's a big unit running occasionally or a small unit running frequently. Why is that wrong?

> I'd think that a fixed amount of air compressed in the compressor means a fixed amount of condensation runoff from the unit

It's not compressing air (like in a car tire). It's compressing a refrigerant. That refrigerant goes through phase changes (liquid to gas).

One major issue is that for most ACs, the compressor is cycled on and off according to the target temperature (via a thermostat, usually at a single location), not humidity. That means humidity can rise without the AC kicking on to bring it down. Remember in most typical houses, temperature and humidity are not very uniformly distributed.

Furthermore, if the humidity rises high enough before the AC kicks on, and then the AC kicks on at high power, you can get sudden localized cooling and then condensation of humidity to liquid water inside the building, which leads to other problems, especially if it happens behind the walls.

Post reply on HN