this post was submitted on 09 Feb 2024
238 points (99.2% liked)

News

23655 readers
2441 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Nine states are teaming up to accelerate adoption of this climate-friendly device.

Death is coming for the old-school gas furnace—and its killer is the humble heat pump. They’re already outselling gas furnaces in the US, and now a coalition of states has signed an agreement to supercharge the gas-to-electric transition by making it as cheap and easy as possible for their residents to switch.

Nine states have signed a memorandum of understanding that says that heat pumps should make up at least 65 percent of residential heating, air conditioning, and water-heating shipments by 2030. (“Shipments” here means systems manufactured, a proxy for how many are actually sold.) By 2040, these states—California, Colorado, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, and Rhode Island—are aiming for 90 percent of those shipments to be heat pumps.

“It’s a really strong signal from states that they’re committed to accelerating this transition to zero-emissions residential buildings,” says Emily Levin, senior policy adviser at the Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM), an association of air-quality agencies that facilitated the agreement. The states will collaborate, for instance, in pursuing federal funding, developing standards for the rollout of heat pumps, and laying out an overarching plan “with priority actions to support widespread electrification of residential buildings.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 5 points 10 months ago (4 children)

I think these will make sense eventually but if most of my electricity in winter comes from gas anyway, is changing where the gas is burned really better?

[–] acoustics_guy@lemmy.world 21 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Yes, on two points. 1) heat pumps are more than 100% efficient in most conditions. Because they are moving heat, rather than generating it, they can add more heat energy to your home than they actually consume. 2) mix of sources. As you said, even if most of your electricity comes from gas plants, that means some can or does come from renewable sources or nuclear. This makes it much easier to transition to even more renewables, since the consumer side doesn't need to change anything as gas plants are phased out. It's future planning with immediate benefits from point 1.

Point 1 can be a bit complex, since in extreme conditions air source heat pumps may rely on resistive heating which is only 100% efficient. Alternatives like ground source HPs don't have that problem, but they are suited to fewer areas.

[–] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Thanks. My climate is relatively mild so I don’t think resistance heating will be necessary. Extreme lows could get to the low 20’s but only for brief periods, so I think heat pumps should still work in such conditions?

[–] FiFoFree@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Our heat pump didn't really kick in the resistive auxiliary heat until temps were well below 0°F, but humidity also plays into that. It wasn't ever running the resistive heat exclusively.

If sized correctly, heat pumps also don't really like setbacks in the winter. Just set the thermostat to whatever and leave it -- don't have it cool down at night and warm back up in the morning.

[–] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 1 points 10 months ago

I like to be warm at night anyway so I don’t have a problem with that.

[–] rhandyrhoads@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago (1 children)

An additional argument I've heard is that economies of scale come into play with power generation. The argument is mainly used around electric vs gas cars when electricity is generated from fossil fuels, but apparently larger plants are generally more efficient at generating energy. This may not hold up when heat is the desired form of energy compared to a gas car where it's a waste product.

[–] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 7 points 10 months ago

Yeah heat is different because converting fossil fuels to motion is inherently inefficient, but converting them to heat is very efficient. But others correctly pointed out that heat pumps are actually more than 100% efficient because they move heat around rather than making it directly.

[–] Ross_audio@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

Gas boilers can by 95% efficient turning gas directly into heat energy.

Electricity generation is about 55% efficient at turning gas into electric energy.

So in a situation where you get 2 times or more heat out per kW you put in then you're lowering your carbon footprint even when electricity is created using gas.

2 to 4 times is not too difficult so

There's also the pretty big issue that the more methane is transported, the more leaks we have. As methane is 40× more potent than CO2 as a greenhouse gas every property we take off the gas network is a step towards reducing the need for that infrastructure.

Personally I can't fit an air source heat pump in my flat. It would be incredibly noisy and would probably require radiators to be refitted and taken up more space.

When my gas boiler goes I'll look at the cost of the standing price of a gas connection, annual servicing, and kW cost of gas. Then look at what a standard electric boiler costs.

It won't have the 2 to 4 times saving on kW cost a heat pump would have but it probably will come out similarly on cost. It will have a lower install cost. And it will reduce methane emissions.

If we haven't moved far enough to renewable energy by then my carbon footprint might actually go up. But the methane reduction will more than make up for that.

[–] ikidd@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I looked into it very seriously, but where I am we regularly get to -40 and are often -20 or lower. All's good up to about that point, but you'll need a gas furnace to assist much past -20. In which case, you are into it for a gas bill anyway of which 2/3 is deliver costs, so you might as well just use a furnace.

And before anyone comes apart on me, I ran off a spreadsheet using very pessimistic gas prices, all the green grants I could come up with and probably overly optimistic heat pump efficiencies at cold weather, and I couldn't make the whole system come in at a price that broke even in less than 20 years. At which point you'd be starting all over again.

So if you're in most of Canada outside of the Lower Mainland and the Niagra Peninsula, and probably a good chunk of the US, no.

[–] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Are we talking Celsius or Fahrenheit? -20 F is pretty cold. I think the vast majority of people in North America never experience weather like that. For most areas, occasional supplemental heating by traditional electric heating should be sufficient and avoid the gas hookup issue. It’s not very efficient but only needing it a few times per winter that should be acceptable.

[–] ikidd@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Celsius

It's not about being efficient. If it were just that, no problem, a few nights of expensive heat isn't going to change the equation much over a year. It's a matter of not freezing because there's no way it can keep up whether inefficient or not.

So if you're going to be spending 5k on a furnace anyway, and have to keep a gas bill active, it's just not going to save enough money to pay the heatpump back, especially since you're buying a particularly expensive model in order to have one that works at middle cold temperatures.

[–] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

I think a powerful enough heater of any kind should keep your warm—so economics is the main question. Perhaps an electric heater that powerful would be too expensive or use too much power.

But regardless, it sounds like you live in an exceptionally cold climate so you may have challenges that the rest of us don’t. I haven’t really heard heat pumps recommended for arctic climates, mainly for temperate ones. My climate is borderline subtropical so I think it will be economical for me.