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

611–620 of 766 posts

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

#611

Post by opo »

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

The problem with rooftop solar is that it is very, very, expensive compared to utility grade solar:

>…Rooftop solar photovoltaic installations on residential buildings and nuclear power have the highest unsubsidized levelized costs of energy generation in the United States. If not for federal and state subsidies, rooftop solar PV would come with a price tag between 117 and 282 U.S. dollars per megawatt hour.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/493797/estimated-leveliz...

If we want to subsidize a renewable energy source, why should we subsidize rooftop solar when we could subsidize utility grade solar or wind? Money is fungible and not unlimited - a dollar that goes to subsidize residential rooftop solar is a dollar that would go much, much further if it was used to subsidize utility grade solar or wind.

Rooftop solar subsidies are also unusual in that much of the subsidy is often paid by less well-off households to subsidize their wealthier neighbors - sort of a reverse Robinhood scheme.

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

#612

Post by idiotsecant »

jbarham wrote: post #590
paranoidrobot wrote: post #580

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 consu…

Is the correct strategy to wait to regulate gas usage until every country on earth does the same? That doesn't seem like a winning strategy. Someone always has to be last.

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

#613

Post by ip26 »

vundercind wrote: post #30
mikeyouse wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Uh, you still need a furnace (though it could be electric) if you live somewhere that ever really gets cold, right? For now - and only in part of the country. Most of the newest models can output 100% of their rating down to something like -5ºF -- they're easy enough to oversize as well, so if your 99% heating load is e.g. 48,000BTU, a 60,000BTU heat pump that's only outputting 80% of rated BTUs due to the extreme…

I’d say -15°F or lower is something you need to design for at least into the light-blue area on this map: http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-tdK_AMaZ9pg/Vb51WrvPDhI/AAAAAAAAD5... Which is quite a lot of the country. Light blue is a typical Winter low point in the -10°F to 0°F, which means you will see -15°F or lower often enough to worry about it.

You can simply add backup resistive heat to cover the occasional 4AM drop to -15F. It’s more expensive to operate, but as long as this is rare it doesn’t significantly change your bill.

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

#614

Post by oooyay »

newZWhoDis wrote: post #368
oooyay wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I made this mistake this year. I pumped $20k into a heat pump system, coming from what used to be Natural Gas. I wasn't given any kind of relief because I live in Oregon where most relief is income based. Then at the beginning of the year PGE announced a 20% rate hike. My house is covered in trees, so solar isn't really an option. I really regretted my decision once I got a $300-$400 bill for heating three mont…

$20k for a heat pump is sky high, you better have gotten a 24 SEER2 state of the art fully variable system for that. If they sold you a 14 SEER1 for that then you got absolutely screwed.

It was a 5 channel heat pump with a single condenser. As the other commenter wrote it was mostly wrapped up in labor. For what it's worth, they're 24 SEER Daikin units. It's priced at replacing the AC and heat for an entire house, so compare it to a large AC installation.

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

#615

Post by Arn_Thor »

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.

You're barking up the wrong tree. (i) systemic change on a global scale is needed, individual actions don't "matter". (ii) corporations and governments are the only entities large enough to make changes. Governments need to force companies and incentivize individuals to make better choices, and help those that would be financially disadvantaged by those choices. (iii) paradoxically, while individual actions don't "matter", they add up of course. Both in energy usuage, and in voting. The latter is more important if we want governments to force and incentivize companies and individuals to make positive changes. So giving the environmental cause a bad name by yelling at individuals for making sensible financial choices is going to cost the green cause voters, which we sorely need.

Stop it.

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

#616

Post by oooyay »

jdeibele wrote: post #317
oooyay wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I made this mistake this year. I pumped $20k into a heat pump system, coming from what used to be Natural Gas. I wasn't given any kind of relief because I live in Oregon where most relief is income based. Then at the beginning of the year PGE announced a 20% rate hike. My house is covered in trees, so solar isn't really an option. I really regretted my decision once I got a $300-$400 bill for heating three mont…

I'm moving from Portland to McMinnville in a couple of months. Price of kwh goes from $.1945/kwh to about $.0720. I've noticed that McMinnville Water & Light doesn't help pay for EV connections, etc. compared to Portland General Electric but at almost 1/3rd the cost, they probably don't need to. MW&L is community-owned, PGE is traded on the NYSE. They both buy a ton of hydro from the Bonneville Power Administration.…

Yeah, this is the move, imo. I think once my mortgage goes positive I'm going to look at where to go next. This is not worth it.

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

#617

Post by oooyay »

interroboink wrote: post #414
newZWhoDis wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$20k for a heat pump is sky high, you better have gotten a 24 SEER2 state of the art fully variable system for that. If they sold you a 14 SEER1 for that then you got absolutely screwed.

Perhaps you know already, but a lot of the price is often the installation labor, not the device itself. Just as a data point, $20K is right in the ballpark for estimates you'll get for professional installation of a modern ≈3-ton forced-air 17SEER heatpump + air handler in the Seattle area.

You hit the nail on the head, but mine is a 5 channel Daikin heat pump. I got a bit of a deal because I paid in cash.

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

#618

Post by sundaeofshock »

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.

“Europe remained the main destination for U.S. LNG exports in December, with 5.43 MT, or just over 61%. In November, 68% of U.S. LNG exports were to Europe, LSEG data showed.”

Of course there is a global market for all fossil fuels.

https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/us-was-top-lng-expor....

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

#619

Post by looofooo0 »

idiotsecant wrote: post #612
jbarham wrote: post #590

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> 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 consu…

Is the correct strategy to wait to regulate gas usage until every country on earth does the same? That doesn't seem like a winning strategy. Someone always has to be last.

It is stupid, with less Gas available on the LNG Market other LNG Producers will increase production or they will use other Energy sources such as coal.

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

#620

Post by kalleboo »

jbarham wrote: post #590
paranoidrobot wrote: post #580

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 consu…

> Ah, so burning Aussie natural gas in Asia is somehow better for the environment than just burning it in Australia?

If it displaces burning coal in Asia, maybe it is? https://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/14670874

Post reply on HN