Electric baseboard heat in house we just bought. Need to replace with new electric heaters.Looking for suggestions. (floors, engineered)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Electric heating is 100% efficient. "Cost-effective" is not the same thing as "efficient". And cost-effective in operating cost is not the same as cost-effective considering purchase and installation cost plus ROI compared to an existing system. Once you start considering things more deeply, the only answer will be "you've got to run the numbers on your own situation".
Frankly I suspect a natural gas fired super-efficient furnace heating forced hot water through baseboard radiators is the most cost-effective for most people who can physically have that installation. But if you also have AC (like most of us), then you've got to consider whether two separate systems - one for AC and one for hot water and heat - is a better choice than a single HVAC system for heating and cooling and a separate water heater.
I guess that in 99% of cases, the decisions are made based on what's there already - as most people don't want to rip out systems that are functioning, nor do they want to do major remodeling.
No such thing as efficient electric baseboard heating. Only efficient heating system is a natural gas forced air system.
You're using "efficient" to mean cheaper to use (and for that matter, cheaper to use where you live -- might not be the same everywhere). But "efficient" has a particular meaning when used to describe heating systems; that's what others have tried to say. Like this poster ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by turf3
Electric heating is 100% efficient."Cost-effective" is not the same thing as "efficient". And cost-effective in operating cost is not the same as cost-effective considering purchase and installation cost plus ROI compared to an existing system. Once you start considering things more deeply, the only answer will be "you've got to run the numbers on your own situation".
“So, for a boiler that produces 210 kW (or 700,000 BTU/h) output for each 300 kW (or 1,000,000 BTU/h) heat-equivalent input, its thermal efficiency is 210/300 = 0.70, or 70%. This means that 30% of the energy is lost to the environment. An electric resistance heater has a thermal efficiency close to 100%”
Unless you live next to a nuclear plant (eg PNW low power rates)...
electric heat will NEVER even be in the running.
That's cost effectiveness, not efficiency.
If you're up north, it can be much more cost effective to heat with a 50 year old oil burner with 55% thermal efficiency than with electric resistance heaters at 100% efficiency. You can afford to throw 45% of the fuel value of the heating oil up the flue because the fuel's so cheap.
And if you're serious you need also to consider cost of new equipment and estimated life along with cost of operation. A $50,000 system that saves you $400/year compared to the $5000 system is not cost effective even though you're getting your heat for fewer $/BTU.
And OP has long since left the thread without ever even explaining why he thinks he needs to replace his heating units - it might be that the most cost effective path when total cost is considered, would be to get new covers to replace old beat-up ones, and replace one or two individual heating elements. (For example, if you're planning to live there two years, even the high cost of heating with electricity may be cheaper than paying for a new setup).
Correct but there's convection and hydronic electric baseboard heat. The convection is the basic heating element that cools off fast when it's in between cycles. The hydronic heaters have oil or water that is heated by the element that stays hot or warm much longer and uses less electric because it doesn't need to heat a cold element all the time. Hydronic baseboard is the best option.
Incorrect. You confuse thermal mass with the kwh needed to maintain heat in a room. Hydronic heat, left on constantly, will allow surfaces to warm to near room temperature, giving a sense of more even heat, and sometimes the ability to lower the heat setting, say from 70 degrees to 67 degrees. The lowering of the setting and reduced demand may seem like it saves money, but the constant drain of heat through the walls offsets that. Put a cheap ceramic heater near some bricks and you can get a similar effect.
To repeat - ALL resistance heating has EXACTLY the same efficiency. It matters not if you coat the heater in oil, water, or salad dressing.
A boiler system is expensive to upkeep especially a oil burner, and if you have hard water you have to add a good water softener to it along with a hot water storage tank. You need separate zone switches and thermostats and valves to purge each zone in a boiler system. A electric furnace is efficient but very expensive to operate. I had a heat pump in Florida and the heat strips felt like a hair dryer and expensive to operate. A forced air natural gas system is the cheapest to maintain and operate. Now for those who don’t have a duct system you can try mini split systems they are still electric though.
Correct but there's convection and hydronic electric baseboard heat. The convection is the basic heating element that cools off fast when it's in between cycles. The hydronic heaters have oil or water that is heated by the element that stays hot or warm much longer and uses less electric because it doesn't need to heat a cold element all the time. Hydronic baseboard is the best option.
All baseboard heating is “convection” heating.
Resistant heating is resistant heating- regardless if you’re heating a heatsink or a fluid. Fluid tends to hold heat molecules longer- so is it more “efficient” or more “effective” over a standing period of time?
Incorrect. You confuse thermal mass with the kwh needed to maintain heat in a room. Hydronic heat, left on constantly, will allow surfaces to warm to near room temperature, giving a sense of more even heat, and sometimes the ability to lower the heat setting, say from 70 degrees to 67 degrees. The lowering of the setting and reduced demand may seem like it saves money, but the constant drain of heat through the walls offsets that. Put a cheap ceramic heater near some bricks and you can get a similar effect.
To repeat - ALL resistance heating has EXACTLY the same efficiency. It matters not if you coat the heater in oil, water, or salad dressing.
You are incorrect. Hydronic heat has copper pipe filled with oil or water and stays warm or hot after the thermostat cuts off. With basic convection baseboard heat the heating element cools off rapidly and has to heat back all the way up to desired thermostat setting. A hydronic unit will take less time to heat up to desired temp because the oil inside retains the heat.
All baseboard heating is “convection” heating.
Resistant heating is resistant heating- regardless if you’re heating a heatsink or a fluid. Fluid tends to hold heat molecules longer- so is it more “efficient” or more “effective” over a standing period of time?
Yes it is you took my post out of context i said "basic" electric convection baseboard heaters. Hydronic electric baseboard electric heat is not the traditional basic convection baseboard heaters. The difference between the two is hydronic has a copper pipe filled with oil or water. With the basic electric resistance baseboard heater when the thermostat cuts off the heat from the element will cool off rapidly. A hydronic electric baseboard heater will retain the heat much longer and not need to be heated up from cold temps all the time like basic resistance type baseboard heaters.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.