Is this a valid heat pump argument?

iplogger1

One of my inlaws who has an interest in the heating system for our
new house build related to me something he saw recently on a BBC
tv news item. He cited this report which was supposed to be saying
that ground source heat pumps were becoming a more compelling
option for folks in UK region on account of the observed/predicted
2-3+ degrees average increase in annual temperatures. I didn't
see the report but I guess they were implying that the subsoil
temperatures would rise also and there might be a higher constant
temp in the 1-1.5 metres of soil where ground source heat collectors
are typically installed.

Is this factual or a load of baloney ? It seemed to be suggesting
that folks should take advantage of global warming to heat their
houses. More generally though doesn't higher avg temps mean less
heat demands for the house. I'll see if I can dig out a video archive
of the report from the internet but I found it a bit of a perverse
argument. Is a side effect of global warming a more efficient ability
for heat pumps to extract heat out of the ground ?

~ipl

boomshackala

With more extreme weather conditions like the continent this may be plausible...however I don't see why you are posting in the green issues forum...ground source heat pumps running from fossil fuel fired power plants are no greener than burning gas directly.

IMHO I do not see why people are attracted to these things....some untrue propaganda about getting heat for free or somethins...

boomshackala

With more extreme weather conditions like the continent this may be plausible...however I don't see why you are posting in the green issues forum...ground source heat pumps running from fossil fuel fired power plants are no greener than burning gas directly.

IMHO I do not see why people are attracted to these things....some untrue propaganda about getting heat for free or something...

Pocari Sweat

Irelands electricity is not altogether fossil, it is also imported part nuclear electricity from the UK.

As the UK kicks back into its nuclear programme, the percentage of Irelands nuke import, should increase considerably.

Pocari Sweat

Also solar energy is not free either. The 5 or 6 m2 of solar panels needed for a house cost a fair bit and when it is too sunny, houses with air conditioning cost a small fortune to keep cool.

Capt'n Midnight

Pocari Sweat wrote:

when it is too sunny, houses with air conditioning cost a small fortune to keep cool.

.

Lemmy from Motorhead wrote:

The question was, what's the greatest ever invention? The Englishman says, well I think it was the telephone. The Scotsman says, no, I think it was the probably the electric light bulb. The Irish guy says, the thermos flask. The guys say, why the thermos flask? he says, Well you know you put hot things in it and they stay hot and you put cold things in it and they stay cold. They say, yeah.
Well how does it know?

air

boomshackala wrote:

IMHO I do not see why people are attracted to these things....some untrue propaganda about getting heat for free or somethins...

Here here, finally someone that agrees that the emperor has no clothes.
IMO heads should roll in SEI over including grants for heat pumps at the current time. In the event that we do ever have predominantly green electricity down the road, the heat pump systems that are currently being installed will likely have been replaced. There should be a national level policy decision made to discourage the use of electricity for heating.

CJhaughey

air wrote:

There should be a national level policy decision made to discourage the use of electricity for heating.

No I disagree, There should be a policy decision made to encourage the use of insulation to 3 or 4 times what is currently building regulations.
I cannot understand why people are against this or that form of heating, if every house was insulated to 3 times the current standards then the energy demands would be drastically lowered.
Superinsulation would allow for small heatpumps to be used.
The problem as I see it is the fact that (a) people want McMansions and (b) don't insulate them well enough or use technologies such as HRV to keep whatever heat they make.

iplogger1

This discussion is interesting. However, I may not have worded my original
post too clearly.

What I was asking about was a report on BBC (which I've yet to hunt
down) which apparently suggested that folks should strongly consider
installing heat pumps on account of ground temperatures rising by
a predicted 2-3degrees or more on average as a result of affects
of global warming. I agree that heat pumps are not green energy.
It was the principle of someone making an argument for heat pumps
on the back of usurping side effects of global warming that made me
raise my eyebrows. It just seemed like a perverse argument to make
to promote the use of heat pumps. They seemed to be saying -
scientists are telling us to expect 2-3 degrees warmer temps on
average and this gives heat pumps an extra kick in efficiency.

Aside from the green energy debate about heat pumps (leaving that
debate aside). Is it even correct to suggest that heat pump will become
more efficient because ground temps are rising on average ?

Maybe it makes a little difference but I'm sure hotter summers will
lead to a need to cool houses (requiring more energy ..air conditioning)

air

CJ, I dont disagree with you at all and I would support your argument for more stringent insulation standards quite fully.
My own point was that a) Electrical resistive heating should be discouraged as a matter of policy as it wastes about two thirds of its energy input and b) that whoever saw heatpumps running at a COP of around 3 on electricity generated at an efficiency of about 33% as somehow being "green" should not be making policy.

boomshackala

Worse still the government are now promoting gas fired CHP....at least with heat pumps there is a chance that the electricity can one day come from a green source...not with gas fired CHP though...

air

Well in fairness I wouldnt be that against the gas fired chp in the medium term. AFAIK, as it stands a lot of gas is being wasted by being used for electricity generation in stations that don't recover much of the waste heat. If the gas fired chp systems are more efficient than this old plant then I would have to be in favour of them.
IMHO gas should be preserved for applications like home heating in condensing boilers or high efficency generators etc. Its a great fuel & should be used carefully.
A further plus for the gas fired chp is that it will increase the distribution of the grid which presumably would improve security of supply etc and if someone was really interested they could supply it with methane from a digester.