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

581–590 of 766 posts

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

#581

Post by BorgHunter »

Detrytus wrote: post #264
BorgHunter wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Modern heat pumps can work in very cold weather, but they're much less efficient, which is reflected in their COP numbers. In my house in Chicago, we have a hybrid system--the heat pump works down to 20F or so, and we have a natural gas furnace for colder times. Natural gas is very cheap here, so this is the most cost-effective solution at the moment. I'm very eager to electrify and remove my dependence on natural gas, but I think it will be at least a few more years unless there's some breakthrough in cold-weather heat pump efficiency, or an enduring spike in natural gas prices--last time I did the math, the breakeven point for electrification here is around a COP of 4, which no heat pump can do at typical Chicago winter temperatures.

If I were building a brand new house, I probably would do it 100% electric. But most people here already have natural gas furnaces, and when they reach end-of-life they're usually replaced with another natural gas furnace. Hybrid systems like mine are catching on, but it will be a while before 100% electric is commonplace here.

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

#582

Post by bongodongobob »

gmerc wrote: post #565
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…

Essentially: We will only accept climate change action if it’s not degrading our standard of living which is predicated on consuming unsustainably. The end.

Yeah, people should freeze or die of heat stroke.

Tell me more about your frictionless spherical world.

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

#583

Post by defrost »

nroets wrote: post #575
sundaeofshock wrote: post #557

Earlier quoted context omitted.

US exported 6.9 trillion cubic feet of natural gas in 2022. https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/natural-gas/imports-and-...

The article says nothing about the cost of shipping gas across the globe. It only says 44% of exports are by pipeline. If shipping makes it an order of magnitude more expensive, then there is no global price.

Order of magnitude?

Large (not ultra large) oil tankers might carry 200,000 tonnes and consume 25 ton of heavy bunker fuel per day.

LNG gas carriers equally have their own stats.

This is something you can (or at the very least should be able to) back of envelope estimate ...

https://www.planete-energies.com/en/media/article/transporti...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W%C3%A4rtsil%C3%A4-Sulzer_RTA9...

Now you just need mean trip times, profit margin, etc. and you're away.

Order of magnitude addition to costs, though, sounds a little extreme.

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

#584

Post by justinzollars »

Wired is owned by Condé Nast. Condé Nast is owned by Advance Publications. Advance Publications, a private, family-held business that owns and invests in a broad range of media, communications, technology, education, and live entertainment companies, including Warner Bros. Discovery, Charter Communications and Reddit.

This is corporate propaganda. Its expensive and won't be adopted. Expensive technology is stupid. People won't adopt it because no one has $100,000 to trench their yard - save a few tech workers in Atherton who wish to virtue signal.

Politicians in these states are virtue signaling.

We need abundant low cost energy. If it has to be carbon free - nuclear is the answer. I personally invest in Uranium because life is a struggle for energy and capital is really a form of stored energy. Nothing is more abundant in potential energy than splitting atoms. Its the answer we will reach.

California is experiencing huge annual increases in energy costs because of virtue signaling. This is more virtue signaling. Yes we can heat our homes with heat pumps. But it will cost 10 times as much money.

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

#585

Post by inferiorhuman »

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…

  But I think the biggest issue in New England (and California) will probably
  be the high cost of electricity. In most of the country, heat pumps are a
  huge no-brainer.
PG&E charges about $2.44/therm (100,000 BTU) here. So yea that's well cheaper than electricity – I think it works out to about half to a third the cost of resistive electric heat. So (for now) a heat pump that's about twice as efficient as a gas furnace would work out to about the same cost. Unless you do something like a mini split where you're heating a smaller area.

The big thing to keep in mind is that California natural gas prices spiked for a bit last year. All of a sudden gas heat was very, very expensive.

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

#586

Post by inferiorhuman »

Spivak wrote: post #387
thelastgallon wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its a wash when gas prices are at historical lows: https://www.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/rngwhhdm.htm

That isn't the table you actually care about because it doesn't hit the residential customer like that. The nominal $/therm in my area has been stable for the last 10 years which might be artificial but to my bank account it's all the same.

Natural gas prices have not remained stable in California.

https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2023-01-06/get-ready-...

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

#588

Post by inferiorhuman »

gnicholas wrote: post #400
brlewis wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not the OP, but probably https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2024/01/30/arizona-proposes-sola...

OP was complaining about CA, and this appears to be an proposed law in AZ. It could affect CA utility prices because it relates to export, but it's not up to CA to decide what laws are passed in another state, governing the usage of land in that state.

In California the switch to NEM 3.0 more or less means that folks with solar will get socked with high monthly fees and much lower export rates (roughly wholesale instead of retail). NEM 3.0 came into effect in April of last year.

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

#589

Post by acomjean »

ta8645 wrote: post #587

Asking this question out of sheer ignorance: Aren't (air-to-air) heat pumps simply bidirectional air-conditioning units? If so, was AC incorrectly maligned for years as being inefficient and expensive?

Yes. We replaced the central air ac this house came with, with a heat pump, so we get heating and cooling.

My understanding is the tech has gotten better and more efficient.

Running heat or ac off electric can be expensive. But climate control is fairly important.

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

#590

Post by jbarham »

paranoidrobot wrote: post #580
jbarham wrote: post #570

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only reason that natural gas prices in Australia have gone up in the past 10 years is that gas producers in the eastern states were able to start exporting gas as LNG. As of 2023, Australia is the world's second largest LNG exporter (source: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1262074/global-lng-expor... ) after the US (take that Russia!) and ahead of Qatar. Great for the gas exporting cartel but not so great for…

> will do nothing for emissions How can that be? Direct consumption emissions are eliminated. Those with solar (a growing percentage) reduce their indirect emissions from grid non-renewable generators. And there is a growing percentage of green generation on the grid.

>> will do nothing for emissions > How can that be?

Because a reduction of domestic gas usage will just be diverted to less efficient LNG exports.

Given that by far the largest source of Victoria's electricity generation capacity is from dirty brown coal [1] if anything banning domestic gas usage might even make emissions worse since it will force people to use only electricity for cooking and heating.

> Direct consumption emissions are eliminated.

Ah, so burning Aussie natural gas in Asia (after it's been liquified and then turned back into gas) is somehow better for the environment than just burning it in Australia?

1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_in_Victoria#Electricity...

Post reply on HN