Saving money on electricity

() said:
So i'm running an experiment...perhaps someone can give me support or find the flaw in it.

I hope to learn how much the set-back saves me, and how much keeping it a few degrees cooler than Mrs. () would like saves me (excepting the other cost factors involved in that...:p )

Any holes in this approach?
If you're having a good time using logic, high-tech engineering, and research to draw a valid quantitative conclusion, then rock on! I want to see the Kill-a-watt v2.0 with the handy RJ-45 or USB plug for automatic data input to our PC.

If you're planning to use the above to persuade your spouse to lower the thermostat, then clearly you haven't been married long enough. But good luck with that...
 
Nords said:
If you're planning to use the above to persuade your spouse to lower the thermostat, then clearly you haven't been married long enough. But good luck with that...

Actually I was looking for a reason to raise it a little as she's always cold!

I think being half my weight has something to do with it, but i'm not sure.

So far yesterday and today are about the same temps, with tomorrow being about the same. The only thing concerning is that its only about 10-15 degrees cooler outside than inside...its a warm week for december! My thinking is that as long as the temp is the same day to day, whether its 15 or 30 degrees colder out should produce the same approximate furnace run-times from a relative perspective...but I could be wrong about that, maybe theres some geometric thing to heating that isnt obvious to me.

Al...an idea for you as far as why your bathroom is cold (aside from it being a long ways from the heat source). Bathrooms are funny beasts in that about five people are usually needed to build them...the carpenter/framing guy, the plumber, the cabinet guy, the flooring guy and the finish guy. Sometimes one or more of them is the same person, but i've seen a lot of bathrooms where the tub and/or the cabinets went in before the insulation did. A lot of builders also wont put insulation in the wall next to a tub as if it gets wet it'll stay wet.

My current bathroom has a platform tub set into a tiled platform. I opened a hole into the area under the tub through the side of an adjacent cabinet and sure enough, no insulation in the walls on that corner...and that room is hot in the summer and cold in the winter...
 
The house is in a natural depression at that mouth of a major canyon so in winter, the cold dense air comes down the canyon and settles in the depression making for a cold location most of the winter. Add to that the low sun angle and a very steep hill on the south side of the house and you have very little chance for solar heating during the day. That requires more furnace time to keep the house a toasty 65 degrees.

I have two set back thermostats, one for the basement unit and one for the rest of the house. The basement unit only gets used when we are down there and with the lower ceilings it heats up faster so I don't need to run it all all until we are down there.

The main floor is cold and drafty due to the high ceilings and open floor plan. Even 68 feels cold most of the time. The bathroom is right above the furnace so it does warm up a bit faster when the heat comes on at 4 am.

I have no intention of spending much time trying to figure out the savings....with DW it is a matter of her comfort so that becomes the #1 priority anyway. :)
 
() said:
. . .
Any holes in this approach?
I don't know for sure, but I can think of a lot of variables that may or may not be important to the results. Even if the days have equivalent highs and lows, they may not have identical temp cycles over 24 hours. Wind is probably a significant factor. Temperature is important, but so is the amount of direct sunshine on your house and windows. The number of times you go in and out of the house during the day will probably have an effect. Are you running the washing machine? dryer? dishwasher? stove? oven? etc? the same amount at the same times each day? Hot showers and baths bring a lot of heat into the house. . .

One suggestion . . . run the three experiment cycle several times in a row and see how much variation you observe with the same thermostat settings as well as how much you observe for different settings.

And please tell us what you find. I'm really interested. :)
 
Well heres what I got, and the variability is well taken.

I wish I could get lots of data points, but this involves moving all my wifes clothes in the master bath closet, pushing out the door to the attic with a pole, putting up a ladder, hoisting myself up and then wiggling on my stomach 17' over to the furnace area over blown in fiberglass insulation :p

As far as weather, we have this pacific storm system sort of sitting on us. The last three days were pretty close to the same. We had a little wind but nothing special or continuous, just a little gusting. It was in the mid to high 50's overnight and the low to mid 60's during the day. Occasional light rain. While the days were different, they werent materially so.

That having been said, my results were so far apart that we're not splitting hairs over 59 degrees one night and 62 the next.

For almost exactly 24 hours (23:59 by the kill-a-watt), day one of 69 during the day and a set back to 62 at 7pm through 4am, producted .94 Kwh. I think I have this math right, at 533W draw on the furnace fan that means the heat ran for just about two hours total during that one day period; at least the fan did.

For almost exactly 48 hours (47:40...I forgot to go check the furnace at the end of the first day and was half asleep before i remembered, so I decided to make this a 2 day test) of running with the thermostat set to 69 solid, the kill-a-watt registerer 3.35Kwh or about 1.65 Kwh and roughly 3 hours per day of furnace run time, or a 50% higher utilization than with the set back.

Construction wise, my house is standard 3 layer stucco (for those in wood house land, thats a standard 2x4 frame on 16" centers, insulated with 4" of fiberglass. Its tar papered, then a heavy wire mesh is attached and three separate layers of mortar are applied; its a little over 1" thick. The attic is filled with between 9 and 12" of blown-in insulation, depending on the drift of the insulation. It needs a good raking and another 3-4" IMO. The attic has gable vents in 3 places, about 35 soffit vents, and a ridge vent (in other words, excellent attic venting). The house is surrounded on three sides by 16-20' tall shrubs that reduce direct wind access to the walls substantially.

In short, fairly well insulated modern construction. Only foible is the lack of ventilation in the walls behind the master bath tub...and I suspect the guest bathtub as well but I have no access.

So in this decidedly unscientific but close enough for hand grenades test, my nighttime setback produced run times of ~ 2 hours instead of a little more than 3. Based on my gas bill of $156 this month last year when I used roughly the same set-back, thats about a $50-60 a month savings.

Icing on the cake? The first of the two days without the setback, I cooked a 24lb turkey in the electric oven, which had the oven running for about 4.5-5 hours and heated the kitchen up pretty well, so the furnace had some significant help for a portion of the test cycle.

So i'm pretty convinced that the setback helps in a surprisingly substantial way. I sort of had this line of thinking that a short term set back (couple of hours) would be ok, as just the air in the house would cool and quickly be re-heated. I figured a moderate term setback would not work as well, as furniture, walls, floors, cabinets and so forth would all cool after 5-6 hours and the furnace would have to run extensively to re-warm all the solid items in the house. Apparently not so.

What may be a big influence is the moderate temps; we're only looking at 10 or 15 degrees outside vs inside. I may have to rerun this test in a few weeks when this weather system moves out and we start back to getting some low 40's at night and low 50's during the day. At least the weather can be very consistent day to day here, so I should be able to pick a couple of cool ones.

With a 25-30 degree inside to outside delta, the "solid stuff" in the house might cool more quickly and to a lower "core temp" than its doing now with the moderate weather, and cause the furnace to have to work harder and longer to re-warm in the morning, producing more equitable results.

But maybe someone with an actual engineering degree in thermodynamics or some such, or someone who actually went to college, or at least someone who goes to mensa could chime in with an opinion or some other test data.
 
() said:
Well heres what I got, and the variability is well taken.

I wish I could get lots of data points, but this involves moving all my wifes clothes in the master bath closet, pushing out the door to the attic with a pole, putting up a ladder, hoisting myself up and then wiggling on my stomach 17' over to the furnace area over blown in fiberglass insulation :p

The thermodynamics aspect is over my head - I barely passed that class 25 years ago.  But I am curious how you change your furnace filter if it's such an arduous journey?
 
Thats in the intake in the ceiling in the hallway.

I dont know WHY they put it in the attic. Its a bit of a space saver but I'd have much rather they had put it in the garage. Its exposed to a lot more heat and cold in the attic than it would be in the garage. Further, the intake and thermostat are at one end of the house, while the furnace was placed at the exact opposite end of the house, and directly over the master bedroom. When the furnace kicks off it sounds like the space shuttle is about to launch.

Further, the intake duct runs about 40 feet from the intake vent to the furnace, then half the output air ducts run all the way back.

Given this and my roof issue, methinks my builder was an idiot.

When the furnace finally dies, I'll put its replacement in the garage, about 8' from the intake and the thermostat. Flip around a few of the ducts and i'm good to go.

I'm sure at #$^%# not cutting holes in the ceiling or removing 40 roof tiles and pulling off the sheeting to get the old one out and a new one in.
 
() said:
So i'm pretty convinced that the setback helps in a surprisingly substantial way.  I sort of had this line of thinking that a short term set back (couple of hours) would be ok, as just the air in the house would cool and quickly be re-heated.  I figured a moderate term setback would not work as well, as furniture, walls, floors, cabinets and so forth would all cool after 5-6 hours and the furnace would have to run extensively to re-warm all the solid items in the house.  Apparently not so.

Interesting results TH.

My hunch is that the real savings are for longer set back periods. The "re-warm" would be a wash wouldn't it? The "mass" cooling down would off-set the warm up the next morning.

Anyway, I never tested it, but I think that set back thermostats are usually a pretty good investment...
 
Couple of more data points.

2 year old Kenmore high volume dehumidifier, specially designed to vibrate and make as much plastic vibration noise as 12 old Ford dashboards, a humongous 1Kwh per hour of operation.

A pleasant surprise...our 5 year old Kenmore front loader clothes washer, standard wash cycle, high speed spin setting, .13Kwh for the full wash cycle.

I'll bet the 220v dryer sitting next to it makes up for that a little bit.

So these energy star/high efficiency dishwashers and clothes washers really DO sip slightly at the outlet.
 
Energy star refrigerator (bottom freezer, 1 yr old) in a 50-55 degree garage has used approximately 1.5Kwh in three days of measuring. Thats about 15-18 cents. I'll have to check it when its 100 out there this summer.
 
() said:
Energy star refrigerator (bottom freezer, 1 yr old) in a 50-55 degree garage has used approximately 1.5Kwh in three days of measuring.  Thats about 15-18 cents.  I'll have to check it when its 100 out there this summer.

You keep your refrigerator out side?
 
73ss454 said:
You keep your refrigerator out side?

Sure. Doesn't everybody?

Actually it is a labor saving/feng shui thing. () placed it right next to the outhouse to be in harmony with the environment and to easily refill when he empties.

Bud Light, anyone? ;)
 
REWahoo! said:
Sure.  Doesn't everybody?

Actually it is a labor saving/feng shui thing.  () placed it right next to the outhouse to be in harmony with the environment and to easily refill when he empties. 

Bud Light, anyone? ;)

Got one in my garage for adult beverages and soft drinks. Plus it is overflow for the kitchen one when we have family over for dinner or if we find a bunch of frozen stuff on sale.
 
*sigh*

Small redux of the Great Refrigerator Disaster of 2005.

I bought a new GE fridge. It never worked right. They tried to fix it about 42 times and got nowhere with it. The last 32 times the repairman told me to ask them for a new one as he couldnt fix it. GE told me I'd have to pay them to replace the fridge they couldnt fix under warranty, even after this many repairs and this much of my time. I dont ****ing think so. So I bought a new Whirlpool fridge, which works wonderfully, and put the unhappy GE one out in my garage. After three months of getting every consumer affairs and complaint bureau on their ass, and probably consuming thousands of dollars and dozens of hours of many many peoples time, a rep from GE's chairmans office called to ask me to call off the dogs, and a new top of the line fridge that costs 2x what I paid for my basic model was on its way.

So now I have a $1400 refrigerator sitting in my garage. Which I'll sell at some point if I can get a good price, which I sort of doubt. I couldnt have held out the couple of months as the defective GE unit wouldnt cool below 42 degrees and all our stuff was going bad in just 2-3 days...and we were keeping the baby formula in there so I had to make it fresh every couple of hours instead of making up a days worth at a time.

For now, REWahoo is halfway correct, its a pretty good labor deferring device. I pull the truck in with a load of groceries and the baby, fridge is directly next to the rear door of the truck. I can shovel all the cold/frozen stuff into it while I make faces at Gabe in his car seat, then I can bring him in the house. Later on when momma is home from work, I can redistribute stuff for handiness purposes into the whirlpool in the kitchen. If I tried to juggle him AND the groceries, it'd be a pain in the butt.

It *is* marvelously handy at times like christmas and easter, when you have an entire turkey or ham or whatnot, along with all the sides, and its very handy for making my monthly 90 minute jaunts to Trader Joes, as I can then fill two freezers with goodies.

I made a halfhearted attempt with Mrs. () to let me bring it in the house and put it in a corner of the kitchen, but that was a no-go. Just as well, its pretty handy where it is.

Since it never really drops far below the mid 40's at night here, and the garage stays in the 50+ range, I can operate the fridge out there year-round. But I've been shutting it off in July and August figuring the 100 degree temps out there are probably making the thing work non-stop and sucking electricity. Next summer...we'll find out.
 
I think I remember my thermodynamics correctly.

The rate of heat transfer is directly proportional to the difference in temperatures between source 1 (inside the house) and source 2 (outside the house). In other words, house real hot, outside real cold = heat transfers very quickly. House only a little warmer than outside, heat transfers slowly.

When the temperature is allowed to drop to 62 at night, the difference in temperature betweeen inside the house and outside is less than what it would be if the thermostat was set at a steady 69. The smaller inside-outside differential results in a lower heat transfer rate during the night, thereby consuming less energy during a 24 hour cycle. Your heat is escaping at a slower rate during the night with the thermostat set at 62 instead of at 69.

I think the physical relationship I'm describing is Newton's law of cooling - http://www.taftan.com/thermodynamics/NEWTON.HTM

Mathematically, the heat transfer can be expressed as a differential equation since the rate of heat transfer is dependent upon the temperature of the source, which is dependent on the heat transfer, etc. etc.

()'s empirical results are much simpler :) Temperature setbacks can save significant amounts of energy. Unless you have a heat pump that has to kick in the extra heating power that is less efficient.
 
Makes sense. So the savings might be greater during a colder spell than what I measured.

I'll have to re-do it when we have a chilly snap thats going to run for a week or so, and be consistent day to day. Not that tough around here (the consistency part). I'll run it for 3-4 days at a pop to get a longer sample size.

I wonder how much less electricity a computer dipped in oil uses than one that has all them there fans running...
 
() said:
I wonder how much less electricity a computer dipped in oil uses than one that has all them there fans running...

Might be significant when you factor in the reduced friction on all those electrons sliding around in there.
 
() said:
I wonder how much less electricity a computer dipped in oil uses than one that has all them there fans running...
I used to work with AN/UYK-7s cooled by chill water.

The challenge is keeping the chill water (1) flowing (2) in the cooling pipes. I'd say that challenge was met about 20 out of every 24 hours, interrupted by 10-minute breaks of pure panic.

So it's not the operating efficiency, it's the personnel wear&tear and the repair costs.
 
What if your rig springs a leak? I imagine cleaning up a couple gallons of spilt motor/cooking oil from your office floor will remind you of why oil-cooled computers never made a big market splash. Although they do look pretty slick.
 
They noted that as a problem. Thats why I'd build it inside a vessel made to hold large volumes of fluid. If I were to do it, I'd do it in an aquarium. Probably be a little fishy otherwise.
 
Back
Top Bottom