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

631–640 of 766 posts

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

#631

Post by [deleted] »

o11c wrote: post #96
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…

Temperature rating is irrelevant if the outdoor unit turns into a solid block of ice before it gets that low. Oddly enough, it tends to snow when it's cold. Even rain can a problem since the nature of a heap pump means the unit is cooler than the surroundings. So often for a few nights of the year, the alleged "heat pump" actually just falls back to electric heating.

[deleted]

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

#632

Post by AnarchismIsCool »

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…

It costs money to transport LNG abroad. Ships, terminal infrastructure maintenance, people, it's all overhead. Ultimately if people stop using natural gas domestically there will be a reduction in production because that overhead eats into the profits of the producers.

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

#633

Post by gregwebs »

bluGill wrote: post #280
gregwebs wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 c…

All modern furnaces I've seen take #2 - use air from outside. Despite that they can get to 99% efficient. It doesn't take much energy to heat up that cold air.

How could it not take much energy to heat up cold air? That plus blowing air is the entirety of what goes on in a forced air ventilation system.

The efficiency rating of a gas furnace assumes the incoming air temperature is close to the desired temperature of the house- that's why it is negligible in the artificial efficiency ratings. If the incoming air is below freezing the efficiency must be different. I wish I could find a study that properly quantified this.

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

#634

Post by Retric »

rapjr9 wrote: post #624
Retric wrote: post #559

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Window heat pumps already exist. Ex: https://www.lg.com/us/air-conditioners/lg-lw1216hr-window-ai... or https://www.compactappliance.com/koldfront-12000-btu-heat-co... Mini splits are also fairly easy to install and don’t take up a window.

These units use electric resistance heating, they do not heat using heat pumps. Mini splits require some gas handling equipment like a pressure gauge that most people will not have. I'm talking about something plug-n-play that anyone can install easily without hiring a contractor. There were a few actual heat pump window units in the past but they are no longer sold and they never made many of them to start with (or…

Well that’s deceptive. Here’s one that lists 8000 BTU and caps at 1.2 kW so that’s a heat pump.

The stated COP of 3.0 at 47° isn’t great, but it’s fine for a backup heat source.

https://www.geappliances.com/appliance/GE-J-Series-Window-Bu...

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

#635

Post by inferiorhuman »

gnicholas wrote: post #609
inferiorhuman wrote: post #588

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> folks with solar will get socked That's not quite right. Existing installs are grandfathered for 20 years, right? [1] 1: https://www.ecowatch.com/solar/net-metering/net-metering-3-0

Right but we're talking the effect on new installs (and upgrades beyond a certain amount, and eventual maintenance on older NEM 1.0 and 2.0 installs). With NEM 1 exports were paid out at retail rates and there were no interconnect fees. With NEM 3 exports are paid at roughly wholesale rates with a $145 monthly interconnect fee. NEM 3 is absolutely an attack on solar installs.

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

#636

Post by gmerc »

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.

I like how this comment spawned anger from both extremes.

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

#637

Post by gmerc »

horns4lyfe wrote: post #566
gmerc wrote: post #565

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Well good luck trying to get people to lower their standard of living in pursuit of an abstract solution to a problem that can only be represented with predictive modeling.

Nah, failure to act on climate change will also reduce their standard of living unless they are rich enough to buy their way to a bunker in NZ.

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

#638

Post by tsimionescu »

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.

If you want to help the environment, you regulate both gas usage and exports. The goal is to keep gas in the ground, where it belongs, not to move it to other countries.

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

#639

Post by skywal_l »

Reason077 wrote: post #532
jhallenworld wrote: post #508

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's more like 2.5 to 3x for good ICE cars (they are around 30% efficient- I think it's been going up over the years, in the past I assumed 15%): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engine_efficiency#:~:text=in%2... . But anyway, the big issue is for electric cars fast chargers, more like $.48 / kwh.. For carbon emissions, the WTW (Well to wheel) efficiency is more important- they are about the same unfortunately (we need…

The fleet average real-world fuel efficiency for light petrol vehicles in my country, based on government data, is 9.2 litres/100km. (I'm guessing it's significantly worse than this in the USA where the average vehicle is larger and there is less focus on fuel efficiency) At 8.9 kWh per litre, that means gasoline takes 81.88 kWh to get you 100 km. A typical EV, on the other hand, will use about 18 kWh to go 100 km (a…

I agree we should look at the whole picture but that would mean to look at how much CO2 is rejected to produce an EV compare to a Petrol car and how much to recycle it.

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

#640

Post by cinntaile »

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…

In the last 3 years coal went from 65% to 58%, expect this trend to continue and even accelerate. See the link below. https://www.energy.vic.gov.au/renewable-energy/victorian-ren...
Post reply on HN