Geothermal installation on water table in 2013?

[raymon]

Sorry to be gone on air conditioning but spending 28 euros for heating seems so huge I thought it was interesting to talk about other systems nearby and which seems more rational to me.
mea culpa.

[Forhorse]

Me too it seems absurd to spend such a sum for a means of heating, especially "nuclear"

If we do a little table corner calculation it gives this:

13kW geothermal heat pump: investment 28.000 €
13 1000W radiant panels: investment 910 €

If we start on a heating bill of 2000 € per year in 100% electric (considering the surface of the house and the region, it seems coherent to me) and counting that the heat pump has an average COP of 4, the heating bill of the CAP would therefore only be € 500 per year.

Over 20 years, the operating cost would therefore be
PAC 28.000 + 20 * 500 = € 38000
Radiant heaters = 910 + 20 * 2000 = € 40910

So basically the CAP only becomes profitable after 19 years ... let's say 16 by including the increase in the cost of electricity.
Provided that the heat pump operates 16 years without any maintenance and without the slightest breakdown, and that I do not believe.

They will tell me "yeah but the CAP will have consumed 4 times less energy, it's more ecological"
Greener? it's still to be proven. Between the manufacturing of the elements and their recycling (gas, oil ...) I doubt it.

[raymon]

Another co2-free solution which also allows you to be in tune with your conscience: you install 3kw of photovoltaic for 11 euros approximately which will produce approximately 000 kWh per year roughly enough to operate your heat pump year to heat you up.
Heck I'm still off topic!

[danielj]

CALCULATIONS over years of heating with a copy of 4 (four!), There you dream. It was the seller who told you that (surely!). But in practice it is impossible because on average the cop is rather 1,5 to 2. A cop of 4 is a maximum that you will reach only exceptionally, Ex: if T ext = 25 ° C and T int = 25 ° C approximately! and this case is totally useless isn't it?
Which means that a cap at the price below is never profitable!
Note: 2000th of electricity / year for heating alone, that's a lot.

Better to isolate (I repeat myself ...)

a + friends

Me too it seems absurd to spend such a sum for a means of heating, especially "nuclear"

If we do a little table corner calculation it gives this:

13kW geothermal heat pump: investment 28.000 €
13 1000W radiant panels: investment 910 €

If we start on a heating bill of 2000 € per year in 100% electric (considering the surface of the house and the region, it seems coherent to me) and counting that the heat pump has an average COP of 4, the heating bill of the CAP would therefore only be € 500 per year.

Over 20 years, the operating cost would therefore be
PAC 28.000 + 20 * 500 = € 38000
Radiant heaters = 910 + 20 * 2000 = € 40910

So basically the CAP only becomes profitable after 19 years ... let's say 16 by including the increase in the cost of electricity.
Provided that the heat pump operates 16 years without any maintenance and without the slightest breakdown, and that I do not believe.

They will tell me "yeah but the CAP will have consumed 4 times less energy, it's more ecological"
Greener? it's still to be proven. Between the manufacturing of the elements and their recycling (gas, oil ...) I doubt it.

[Forhorse]

I suspect that the cop of 4 is frankly realistic, nor the 2000 € of heating per year.
It was precisely to show that even taking the most favorable cases for the PAC, it is not ready to be profitable since even in these conditions which would be very in favor of it, it would still take 19 years to profit from the installation. And we know very well that it is impossible for this kind of device to work for 19 years without the slightest maintenance / failure.
What makes the reality is that this CAP is impossible to make profitable, contrary to what sellers believe ...

To be convinced it is simple, when a salesperson offers you a heat pump at this price, require a guarantee over the period of so-called profitability (calculation supported)
You will see that none will be ready to take this risk ... or against an overpriced maintenance contract!

[Gaston]

You will see that none will be ready to take this risk ... or against an overpriced maintenance contract!

Or those who will close the box soon

[raymon]

CALCULATIONS over years of heating with a copy of 4 (four!), There you dream. It was the seller who told you that (surely!). But in practice it is impossible because on average the cop is rather 1,5 to 2. A cop of 4 is a maximum that you will reach only exceptionally,

4 no rather 5,68 to 7 ° for a model which gives 2,5 kw in heat all this is related to the size of the interior and exterior radiators. At my consumption 100,4w outside temperature 12,7 ° and it rains therefore since this morning therefore no solar contribution.

http://www.climshop.com/toshiba-super-d ... -1388.html

The calculations are probably done in a weird way but 5,68 is a lot. Now we no longer say cop but scop

http://www.enerzine.com/14/14597+direct ... nier+.html

Likewise, improving the efficiency of air conditioning systems can only go through an increase in the size of indoor and outdoor units, which Panasonic has already done with its PACi model, whose unit design has been entirely redesigned. It has also completely revised its coils and fans so that they reach the level of energy efficiency required by the directive. In some cases, according to the Japanese manufacturer, "it was necessary to switch from alternating current to direct current to supply the motors."

[danielj]

A cop advertised from 6 to 7 is a coef measured in the laboratory under conditions that you will almost never have in reality. It is even often a Calculated cop which does not take into account various expenses, in particular energy to defrost in winters!
The proof that there is a "wolf" is that the promises not being kept, we change the standard as you pointed out! !
Beware the standard is for 2015:
(Going to the seasonal COP will give more accurate information on the real energy efficiency of air conditioning systems and heat pumps. If the changes brought about by this directive will not take effect until 2015 for heat pumps, the group Panasonic (see box) has already announced that its products comply with the new standard.)
A+ )

CALCULATIONS over years of heating with a copy of 4 (four!), There you dream. It was the seller who told you that (surely!). But in practice it is impossible because on average the cop is rather 1,5 to 2. A cop of 4 is a maximum that you will reach only exceptionally,

4 no rather 5,68 to 7 ° for a model which gives 2,5 kw in heat all this is related to the size of the interior and exterior radiators. At my consumption 100,4w outside temperature 12,7 ° and it rains therefore since this morning therefore no solar contribution.

http://www.climshop.com/toshiba-super-d ... -1388.html

The calculations are probably done in a weird way but 5,68 is a lot. Now we no longer say cop but scop

http://www.enerzine.com/14/14597+direct ... nier+.html

Likewise, improving the efficiency of air conditioning systems can only go through an increase in the size of indoor and outdoor units, which Panasonic has already done with its PACi model, whose unit design has been entirely redesigned. It has also completely revised its coils and fans so that they reach the level of energy efficiency required by the directive. In some cases, according to the Japanese manufacturer, "it was necessary to switch from alternating current to direct current to supply the motors."

[chatelot16]

why defrost? since we are talking about a heat pump on a water table whose temperature is always sufficient

why not a cop of 4?

with a cold source at 10 ° and a floor heating at 30 ° the theoretical maximum cop is impressive

cop = 1 / (1 - Tfroid / Tchaud)
Tfroid = 273 + 10 ° = 283K
Tchaud = 273 + 40 ° = 313K

cop = 1 / (1 - 283/313) = 10,4

of course in real life nothing is perfect, and this theoretical maximum will not be reached, it is still easy to get half so cop = 5

it is even possible to do better than half of the theoretical cop, but alas what is currently found in the trade is not glorious ... both too expensive and not very efficient ... there are still things to invent

[raymon]

it is even possible to do better than half of the theoretical cop, but alas what is currently found in the trade is not glorious ... both too expensive and not very efficient ... there are still things to invent

We could probably do better with a pump on a tablecloth but very little supply of small series so expensive. Few people have a well in the garden or even garden to bury very small market pipe of little commercial interest.
Especially since some reversible air conditioning have close performance for much less.

For the manufacturer data when I buy a car I know that the manufacturer data is false but their performance in the lab gives me an idea of ​​the consumption in reality. Ditto for air conditioning.
This winter I will spend the same amount as last year on heating with very little wood and a little renewable electricity in my case and I would not have mounted my wood on the 2nd floor.