Hacker News Reader

Comment by _aavaa_ | Hacker News Reader

They are not the same though. This leads to issues with prominent people, see Vaclav Smil, making the case that it'll be too difficult to transition from fossil fuels because they conflate these two things. Some do it out of ignorance, others know better and do it since it's in their financial interest.

As long as we conflate the two, people will more easily be misinformed and think they need to replace their 41 MWh of heating oil with 41 MWh of electricity. But they don't. They need at most 41 MWh of heating. And as you said, your heat pump is probably getting you and average COP of at least 3. Meaning they will need to pay for fewer "MWh" in order to get the same amount of heat to your house.

It is more efficient, just as it's more efficient to charge and EV of a grid running on natural gas than it is burning the petrol in an ICE. Both are also far better for pollution.

View on HN

The two are the same as far as my computation of my household’s reduction in energy usage is concerned. That is why I converted to the same units.

As for needing 41MWh of heat, that is incorrect as my boiler was only 86% efficient and the one it replaced was even less efficient. It is also incorrect as the efficiency gains had reduced oil usage to 18MWh. Heat wise, I only need around 15MWh per year (although I likely needed more this year since it was particularly cold).

I have a suspicion that the ducted method of heat delivery used by my heat pump has more losses than the hot water system previously used to deliver heat. I had been sealing the central AC ducts in the winter to save a few hundred gallons of oil usage. I can no longer do that as heat is delivered via those ducts now.

I don’t disagree with you about furnace efficiency.

But my point still stands: You needed 18MWh of oil or 15MWh of heating. Neither of those numbers are how much electricity you will need to run a heat pump.

Dividing 15kWh by the average COP should determine it, although heat demands change from year to year and temperatures vary, causing not only the amount of heat needed to vary, but the average COP to vary too.

Ask yourself what is the difference between a heat pump and an electric resistance heater?

This does not matter for total energy usage calculations unless you consider the environmental heat to be an input, but as far as the industry is concerned, it is free, which is why the COP for heat pumps is greater than 1.

If you were comparing gasoline in a car to an EV I would maybe see what you are talking about- engines are like 30% efficient so the conversion to useful energy requires a large multiple of potential energy.

But in the case of an oil- or gas- fired furnace, their thermal efficiency is at least 80%, and often more, so their potential energy usage is close enough to directly comparable to their heating value.

I don’t know that I disagreed with you. Yes it might be close to their heating value but it’s fundamentally measuring something different.

Energy usage as does not care about whether any of the energy is wasted. If it did, a 100W incandescent light bulbs would only use 1W of power.

Mine was 86% efficient, although for accounting purposes, I considered the waste energy to be part of energy consumption, which seems to be the most sensible way of doing it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com