Hacker News Reader

> Regarding heat pumps phasing out gas heat, in NY it isn’t feasible. It gets too cold.

Not true, heat pumps are widely used as primary heat sources in environments as cold or colder than NY, like in Montreal and other parts of Canada. The take that heat pump tech only works in very moderate temperatures is stale at this point.

Usually that works one of two ways:

1. Ground source heat pump -- which can work pretty much anywhere people live, but costs a lot more and people don't necessarily know about them.

2. Failover to resistive heating when it gets too cold outside. It's fine to do this in Montreal, because electricity is relatively inexpensive there. It's fine to do this in New York City, or even somewhere a little cooler like Boston, because you're doing it for max like 2 days a year even in an outlier year. Not sure if it's fine to do this in Buffalo.

3. an actual modern air-source heat pump, that still has a COP of close to 2.0 at 5F (as listed here: https://ashp.neep.org/#!/

> Not true, heat pumps are widely used as primary heat sources in environments as cold or colder than NY, like in Montreal and other parts of Canada.

As the owner of a 5 year old heat pump in a milder climate in Indiana, I can tell you this:

* When it is under 10°F, my heat pump switches to emergency heat... forced air electric and is very expensive to run. * Often the temperature swings are pretty wild... 40-50 degrees and that also can force emergency heat.

Oh, and since the electric company is usually using gas to generate the electricity, isn't the environmental impact somewhat of a wash?

Yep if you live in Indiana your electricity comes from gas or coal, there's a tiny bit of generation from a wind farm in the northwest corner of the state and some scattered token solar farms.

You bought a shitty heat pump and decided you were okay with living in a state that produces electricity using fossil fuels. What's your point again?

What state doesn't produce electricity using fossil fuels? At midnight last night, which wasn't atypical, California was 50% natural gas and the total CO2 emitting is even greater due to imports and CO2 emitting renewables.

Vermont is mostly green via hydroelectric and wind

Vermont also consumes ~3x more energy (all energy, not just electricity) than it produces and has the lowest energy consumption of any state.

https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=VT

I've noticed often the response to criticism is "you should have spent $10k more". And the people who spent the extra who enquire about excessive costs then get met with "why did you over-spec your system?" lol

I bought the best product available at the time. Since Iceland is the only nation on earth that has successfully kicked the fossil fuel habit (11% of energy is produced by burning fossil fuels), I suppose you are suggesting I move there to blunt my aching conscience. I'm sure Iceland is nice, but I think I'd squander any environmental benefit flying to see my friends, relatives and immediate family.

Interesting reading: https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/countries-least-dependen...

You do not have a Mitsubishi hyper-heat unit, then.

When your heat pump is using emergency heat yes it'd be "better" to burn natural gas to do so directly that to burn gas to make electricity to do resistive heating.

However you need to look more at the average scenario to draw a complete picture. When your heat pump isn't in emergency heating then it's more efficient to burn the gas for electricity to power that heat pump than it is to burn the gas for heat (moving heat is substantially cheaper than making heat). So how often is your heat pump in regular heating vs. emergency heat? And then is it in emergency heating often enough to justify having a secondary piece of infrastructure to get gas to your house where you then also need a gas furnace which is more expensive than some resistive heat strips are?

I'd love to have gas forced-air as the emergency heat on my heat pump. Best of all worlds.

> Oh, and since the electric company is usually using gas to generate the electricity, isn't the environmental impact somewhat of a wash?

This is something that can be improved.

> And not to mention, gas is still the first choice for most serious cooks, so the small benefit comes at relatively large cost to lifestyle.

Induction is fantastic and even superior to gas in some ways (even faster for boiling water, for example). While some may still prefer gas, given that induction gives instant power and is more powerful, I have a hard time believing that it results in a "large cost to lifestyle".

Besides, gas stoves actually cause a significant amount of indoor air pollution, which may be more relevant than the climate change impact. They are quite literally bad for you: https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/have-a-gas-stove-how-to-...

> Children living in households that use gas stoves for cooking are 42% more likely to have asthma

> Regarding heat pumps phasing out gas heat, in NY it isn’t feasible. It gets too cold

I live in MA and heat my whole house with a heat pump. It works fine. I have an electric strip for backup.

My house (and heat pump) are five years old. The newer ones are better; Lennox's new model can work in Upstate New York without a backup heat source: https://www.energy.gov/articles/doe-announces-breakthrough-r...

(I will admit that I have a gas stove in my basement to handle power outages, a gas stove, and a gas grill. I will also admit that I really, really regret installing a gas stove and will switch to an induction stove when it's time to replace the stove.)

> I really, really regret installing a gas stove

Why?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35756895

We HAVE to run the fan when we turn on the stove or oven. That's not the case with electric / induction.

Of everything you’re aerosolizing while cooking, the combustion byproducts are almost certainly the least impactful.

Given your concerns, I wouldn’t cook using electric/induction without the fan on either.

It is not too cold in New York for heat pumps. With 20 year old technology yes, it would have required supplemental heat. Not anymore though, not until you get down around -25/-30f, at that point a resistive heater kicks in to assist.

Perhaps I worded my comment incorrectly. Yes, heat pumps can work in New York. But, a backup heat system in that climate would be prudent.

Auxiliary heat is built into a heat pump due to the need for a defrost cycle. The auxiliary is the backup.

We live in Denver and saw -10, -15 this winter. Our heat pump is 100% efficient down to -10, and still reasonably efficient at -25. Our whole house is on it. No gas.

I live in upstate NY - plenty of people rely on heat pumps as a primary source. You need backup systems for natural gas and oil in this climate too, for what it's worth. They won't run when the power goes out.

What happens, exactly, when everyone’s resistive heater kicks in, the grid is overloaded, and we wind up with rolling blackouts in -30 weather?

Most new buildings in NYC are already heat pump based.

For the obvious reason that it’s much cheaper.

Ban cooking gas as well, and they save a ton of money running gas pipes, and utility companies having to maintain that gas pipe.

Also, “serious cooks” can still use their gas stoves. They just need to hook it up to a cylinder like most of the world manages just fine, but apparently the people in the richest country in the world can’t figure out.

Arguably propane may be better for serious cooking, too. Chefs like to cook things a lot hotter than the average person, and LPG burns hotter than natural gas.

I live north of New York, in Canada, and use a heat pump for heating. It works perfectly well.

2 weeks ago I met a Chinese chef, the kind that cooks with a wok on those extremely noisy burners. He thinks induction is better than anything.

> in NY it isn’t feasible. It gets too cold

Scandinavia here. Heat pumps work just fine down to -20C

If you want to be a serious cook work in a commercial kitchen.

Induction is a far better choice for residential use.

I can't afford to eat out every meal, not with 3 kids at home. Unless the meal is $20/person I can do better myself at home, and even many of the expensive ones are disappointing compared to what I can do for a fraction of the cost. Good tools help me cook better.

Hence induction stoves.

i just looked on home depot dot com

gas ranges: $949, $848, $676. boujee model is $1199

induction ranges: $1198 starting, $4138, $1848, $1598, $2498

plus i can't use my nice copper diffuser with them :(

nah, imma stick to gas :)

If I look to Europe I see induction stoves competitive in price and features to regular electric stoves. In the us they are only on a few high end stoves and not competitively prices. There are a lot of options you might look for in a stove that you cannot get if you also want induction.

By stove I mean the cooktop and oven in one package. That is what my house needs so I haven't looked at the other options.

So many people have seperate hob/oven?

This is the more common arrangement where I am and the price difference are much smaller.

The majority have the all in one. The separates is not uncommon by any means, but it isn't what the majority have.

Bought a induction range/oven just a few years ago. Was 450€.

Dunno what kind of pricing y'all have on that side of the Atlantic.

Minimum double the cost. Very frustrating as someone with an electric stove that I hate, but it just isn't worth the cost to replace it.