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

281–290 of 766 posts

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

#281

Post by KptMarchewa »

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?

Removing those subsidies while keeping fossil fuel ones is kind of attack.

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

#282

Post by mauvehaus »

aqfamnzc wrote: post #246
turtlebits wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, HVAC contractors in the US massively overcharge. I saved ~ 10k doing the install myself. The equipment is inexpensive, labor can be upwards of 2x equipment cost.

Do you feel like the number of invisible footguns was manageable? That's always my concern with diy trades stuff, the things that seem fine at install but come back to bite you 6mo later.

In general with contractors, you aren't paying for them to do the simple stuff right. You're paying them to get the one or two weird bits of the job done quickly and efficiently because they've seen something like it before and have the tools and parts on their truck.

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

#283

Post by lex-lightning »

lex-lightning wrote: post #247
bagels wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How? It's $0.52/kwh here, and before that rate increase, we were paying (edit) $278/mo in the summer for similar (70 year old 3 bedroom house), and slightly lower temepratures.

Time-of-day program with SMUD. Ran the AC as cool as it could go before peak, turned it off during peak. At move-in we dumped multiple feet of insulation (more than code requires) into the place. At worst it got to 80 degrees. Might have been a bit over $100, but I’m just as flabbergasted at your $278.

Lol. Dogpile away. Imma count my money I saved and sit here in my early retirement.

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

#284

Post by exe34 »

colechristensen wrote: post #244
exe34 wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

You seem to be missing something fundamental here, I’m not sure what it is. How do you think heat pumps work?

What I had in mind was that heating and cooling using an air-conditioner, a fridge or a "heat pump" is fundamentally the same thing, and electricity is just one way of driving it. Ultimately you have a gas that you compress to release heat (outside for AC, inside for heat pump), which then expands (inside for A/C, outside for a heat pump). The compressor can run off a pedal bike for all it cares.

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

#285

Post by floxy »

gnicholas wrote: post #245
lex-lightning wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

When I looked into this, I learned that we pay 2x what neighboring states pay.

Looks like California has the 3rd highest rate after Hawaii and Rhode Island:

https://www.chooseenergy.com/electricity-rates-by-state/

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

#286

Post by SECProto »

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?

All electricity generation throughout the US is subsidized in various ways already - eg low interest loans for new generation capacity, programs for low income earners, not (or not effectively) charging for carbon and methane emissions, low fuel taxes on sources used for electricity generation. The "subsidies" you list help make a desirable energy source compete on a more level playing field - matching benefits that competing energy sources already receive.

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

#287

Post by what_ever »

lex-lightning wrote: post #247
bagels wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How? It's $0.52/kwh here, and before that rate increase, we were paying (edit) $278/mo in the summer for similar (70 year old 3 bedroom house), and slightly lower temepratures.

Time-of-day program with SMUD. Ran the AC as cool as it could go before peak, turned it off during peak. At move-in we dumped multiple feet of insulation (more than code requires) into the place. At worst it got to 80 degrees. Might have been a bit over $100, but I’m just as flabbergasted at your $278.

I think you are out of touch. You need to compare the PGE rates with SMUD to get the picture.

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

https://www.pge.com/assets/pge/docs/account/rate-plans/resid... (PDF File)

PGE's off-peak rates are 3x SMUD's off-peak rates. PGE's peak rates are 1.5x to almost 2x of SMUD's peak rates.

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

#288

Post by david422 »

theogravity wrote: post #79
david422 wrote: post #60

I recently got heat pumps in the hopes that I could phase out my oil furnace. What I can say so far is: The temperature is wildly inconsistent. I don't know if this is a software issue, a hardware issue, or just the way heatpumps work. I've had the installer come back and look at it, I've had the heat pump rep come and look at it too. They basically checked everything and tried to convince me this is normal. With oil…

I had my heat pump installed in Dec. The contractor really screwed up where they wired the zoning incorrectly - the upper floor thermo controlled the lower damper and vice versa, meaning that the pump would run almost indefinitely because the thermostat would never register the temp of the opposing floor. It took me a full week to troubleshoot this (what helped was I bought a thermometer and placed it next to the the…

> the upper floor thermo controlled the lower damper and vice versa

I have 2 floors with multiple units and I was running around with a wall thermometer taking measurements. This was actually my guess as well since the temperatures seemed to align this way. But the installer assured me it was wired correctly .... I might need to find someone else to check things.

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

#289

Post by tilwidnk »

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…

We've owned three homes, our first one had a heat pump. In Virginia. It generally sucked. It wasn't as good as real A/C in the summer and wasn't as good as gas or electric heat in the winter. I hope to never end up in a place that uses a heat pump.

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

#290

Post by bluGill »

david422 wrote: post #265
exe34 wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

That has been proposed. Well the proposal was to run a small engine powering a generator, then you cool the engine to heat the house, while the electric is sold (or otherwise powers the house). However modern gas furnaces are > 90% efficient and it is hard to get an engine that efficient for heat (remember the engine will be running indoors so it needs to not fill the house with noise of CO). I think no matter how you look at it, you can't make this system more efficient than just using the furnace to generate heat without the engine.
Post reply on HN