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

261–270 of 766 posts

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

#261

Post by gnicholas »

shadowpho wrote: post #123
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

I have a not-terribly-efficient PHEV (2014 CMAX), and depending on where we are in our tiered monthly usage it may be more expensive to use electricity. We still do, since the cost difference isn't huge and it's nice to ride with less emissions/noise. But it is maddening that PG&E charges so much that this is even possible (in CA, where gasoline prices are also sky-high!).

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

#262

Post by gregwebs »

bagels wrote: post #214
mdasen wrote: post #174

One of the big problems with heat pumps in New England is that our electricity costs 1.7x the US average ( https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/epm_table_grapher.ph... ). If you're in the South, a heat pump makes perfect sense. You're going to want AC anyway and it'll be way more efficient and save a ton of money when you want heat. In most of the country, even if it gets cold your electricity prices are still a t…

Right, the heat pump will reduce energy use to maybe 1/3 of a gas furnace, but natural gas is something like 6x cheaper for the same amount of energy, so it is an expensive folly. If California is serious about this, they need to reign in the utilities to reduce prices and or stop the attacks on solar installation.

There are second order effects from natural gas use in an actual furnace that aren't taken into account in price of energy comparisons. A furnace has to either

1) exhaust out air initially drawn from the house which must be replaced by cold outdoor air coming into the house (this requires more heating of the house) 2) take in fresh cold air for combustion and exhaust that (which requires extra energy to heat up the cold air)

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

#263

Post by TheOsiris »

gnicholas wrote: post #243
bagels wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, the heat pump will reduce energy use to maybe 1/3 of a gas furnace, but natural gas is something like 6x cheaper for the same amount of energy, so it is an expensive folly. If California is serious about this, they need to reign in the utilities to reduce prices and or stop the attacks on solar installation.

> stop the attacks on solar installation I've not heard of any attacks, just reductions in subsidies (tax credits, net metering). Can you share what you're referring to?

isn't that an attack? removing/reducing subsidies removes incentives for people to install more solar

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

#264

Post by Detrytus »

BorgHunter wrote: post #148
Detrytus wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Heat pumps are much more common in warm areas than cold ones, because the difference between an A/C and a heat pump is really just the ability to reverse the refrigerant flow, and they're very efficient at heating in mildly cold weather. I grew up in Florida, and pretty much every house there had a heat pump even thirty years ago, with electric resistive heating that kicks in when ambient temperatures drop below 40F…

My sister just got a heat pump installed in her new house in Poland, where temperatures occasionally drop to 0 Fahrenheit. I wouldn't say they only work in "mildly cold weather" - as per new EU policy heat pumps will be one of the few legal heat sources, even in countries such as Sweden.

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

#265

Post by david422 »

exe34 wrote: post #239
bagels wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, the heat pump will reduce energy use to maybe 1/3 of a gas furnace, but natural gas is something like 6x cheaper for the same amount of energy, so it is an expensive folly. If California is serious about this, they need to reign in the utilities to reduce prices and or stop the attacks on solar installation.

Is there a reason heat pumps use electricity? I would have thought the same approach would work with gas - you only need to burn a fraction of the gas to drive the "fridge" backwards?

I think you are back to where you started. If it was cheaper to use gas to run a heat pump then everybody would just run generators in their houses off of gas instead of using electrical lines.

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

#266

Post by losvedir »

lex-lightning wrote: post #198
mdasen wrote: post #174

One of the big problems with heat pumps in New England is that our electricity costs 1.7x the US average ( https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/epm_table_grapher.ph... ). If you're in the South, a heat pump makes perfect sense. You're going to want AC anyway and it'll be way more efficient and save a ton of money when you want heat. In most of the country, even if it gets cold your electricity prices are still a t…

Alright, maybe I’m out of touch, but I don’t think electricity is expensive in California. Even during 115 degree heatwaves in a 70-year-old, 3-bedroom, single-family home. Most I paid was $100 in a month with 2 people with gaming computers working from home. Not everyone has that kind of money, but my point is that most people have cell service and other services which add up to more than electricity costs. That’s f…

FYI, a monthly bill is essentially useless information. How big is your house? What are you using it for? How efficient is your fridge? Your A/C? How much is the fixed cost part of the bill? Etc.

I'm assuming, since you mention Sacramento and peak hours, these[0] are your rates? Next time, share those so folks in other places can compare. That page has these:

Summer:

* Off-peak: $0.1425 kWh

* Mid-peak: $0.1967 kWh

* Peak: $0.3462 kWh

Non-Summer

* Off-peak: $0.1151 kWh

* Peak: $0.1590 kWh

That's pretty high, but I think middling to low for California. For comparison, in my town outside Chicago, we have a year-round all-day rate of $0.12 kWh.

[0] https://www.smud.org/en/Rate-Information/Residential-rates

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

#267

Post by bluGill »

nostrademons wrote: post #81
herpdyderp wrote: post #5

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

So the usual blue-state suspects, minus Washington and a bunch of the New England states.

Several red states (the TVA) have had heat pumps as normal for decades. Now heat pumps work better and so they should extend to the other states.

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

#268

Post by theteapot »

mdasen wrote: post #174

One of the big problems with heat pumps in New England is that our electricity costs 1.7x the US average ( https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/epm_table_grapher.ph... ). If you're in the South, a heat pump makes perfect sense. You're going to want AC anyway and it'll be way more efficient and save a ton of money when you want heat. In most of the country, even if it gets cold your electricity prices are still a t…

> Heat pumps do work into freezing New England temperatures, but they're a bit less efficient as it gets to zero fahrenheit.

What's the temperature in the ground? Did you look at a ground source heat pump (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground_source_heat_pump)

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

#269

Post by gnicholas »

TheOsiris wrote: post #263
gnicholas wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> stop the attacks on solar installation I've not heard of any attacks, just reductions in subsidies (tax credits, net metering). Can you share what you're referring to?

isn't that an attack? removing/reducing subsidies removes incentives for people to install more solar

I don't generally view the removal of subsidies as being "attacks". I view that as the end of the free money.

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

#270

Post by david422 »

bruce511 wrote: post #190
mdasen wrote: post #174

One of the big problems with heat pumps in New England is that our electricity costs 1.7x the US average ( https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/epm_table_grapher.ph... ). If you're in the South, a heat pump makes perfect sense. You're going to want AC anyway and it'll be way more efficient and save a ton of money when you want heat. In most of the country, even if it gets cold your electricity prices are still a t…

I'm not in NE, so forgive me if this is obvious, but high electricity prices might make solar attractive to you. (Unrelated to the heat-pump question.) I'm in a similar high-priced environment, but we get a fair amount of sun. I'm getting around a 16% return on capital based on electricity usage reduction.

I use solar, but using heat pumps and an electric car uses maybe 3x more electricity than my roof can produce.
Post reply on HN