If you get one, just make sure to get the dimensioning right. They are WAY more complex to plan, install and maintain than traditional heating.
I was not familiar with this term before, had to look it up.
It makes for a fun acronym DACH meaning roof in german. If they used Ö why not DÖS with an S for Schweiz then ?
Because this consortium seemingly has nothing to do with receiving license plate assignments. And the acronym seems to derive from your general vernacular, lending its name to many other things.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geographical_distribution_of_G...
Only if you place them within <700sqft (for a typical indoor residential location). Only in areas smaller will you need to duct them, somewhat similarly to:
<https://i.imgur.com/4wCez9u.jpeg> this specific design draws from both bath and bedroom [dual 6" inlets], exhausts into kitchen [single 8" outlet] | utility closet is only 5ft x 4ft (~20sqft)
As an added bonus it'll passively dehumidify/cool whereever it drafts to/from.
I'm curious what about them would be more difficult to plan, install, and maintain. Obviously there are many things to consider when retrofitting a building with a central gas furnace... but otherwise why would they be much more complicated than an air conditioning system?
This isn't a problem with regular air-conditioning that is provisioned correctly for the size of your home, because it winds up actively running a lot of the time so the water is draining as new humidity condenses.
It’s good to see this brought up and discussed more.
And yet in Austria, most apartment buildings in big cities are still heated by burning heating oil, gas or even firewood. Worst of the worst for air quality.
Walk through Graz in sub-zero winters and it's like you're breathing in a barbeque bonfire. Even your clothes smell like soot when you get home if you've been out too long. Which is bizarre to me, considering how much posturing and chest thumping Austria is doing about how green and anti-Nuclear they are yet they love burring wood and oil. Male this make sense please.
Sure, rich people in the bacon belt living in single family homes in the suburbs or rural areas, have heat pumps, solar panels on the roof and a Tesla in the garage, but that's a different story compared to those living in the city stuck in the fossil fuel stone age, where they have no choice over their rented building's heating method.
How do you convert the city's apartment buildings to heat pumps? Is it a technological limitation? Money limitation? Bureaucratic and political limitation? All of the above?
Firewood and heating oil isn't cheaper, it merely has lower upfront cost in exchange for a higher total cost. An efficient governance system (whether that's capitalism and banks with loans or renting out the hearpumps or a centrally planned replacement program or anything else) would figure out the financing and save the system money by updating.
Technology can make the incentives even larger. Excess money can make it easier for the governance system to reach the solution. But it's at the point where without any improvement to either an ideal system would figure out how to make the switch happen.
That means they are sometimes economically incentivized to choose an option with lower initial cost but a higher running cost. Governments can/do bend these incentives via taxes but it can be hard/expensive to renovate old complexes (and that part cannot directly be offloaded by the landlord).
Best way to get around this is making heat pumps more accessible (easy to get, financing options), as well as legislation (banning gas/oil heating).
So if people on HN see what the solution is, why isn't the Austrian government doing it, to get rid of polluting fossil fuel heating in the cities?
Then why are most Austrian apartment buildings in cities still burning oil and gas for heating and not all switched to heat pumps if it's so green and progressive? Why is Graz air quality getting worse and worse?
> The "subsidy stop" the article refers to was stopping 100% subsidies.
Which article? What subsidies? What are you talking about? I never mentioned anything like this.
2) To have solar installation you have to abaid to painfully stupid legistlation
3) In winter pump is as green as the diesel generator that produces energy for it to run
I wonder what it is and whether it applies to a lot of other people?
1) well, there's a grid. So as long as someone somewhere on your continent produces green energy it is viable and green.
2) arguable. Depends on your legislation.
3) Again, there's a grid. And even considering the worst case of no renewable sources at all: A heat pump (which uses 1kWh of electricity to provide 3-6kWh of heat) powered by a diesel generator is still more efficient than burning the diesel directly. Now add efficient combined cycle power plants, wind, biomass, hydro and battery storage systems...
The reason why powerplants have to be strategically distributed around the country and have to consist of multiple different power geration sources.
Cyting Germany’s cancelor „Going full green was a strategic mistake”
Ps. Heat pump is as effective as the heat source it can use..
Even in winter, electricity from the grid is greener than burning diesel. I didn't find specific numbers for winter, but wind is about 30% of Germany's (just picking the biggest country out of DACH to support the point, not trying to come up with exact numbers) electricity production year-round, and wind doesn't tank in winter like solar does.
So, in short. Installing a heat pump and just taking electricity from the grid is still better for the environment. Of course, having your own solar is great if you live in a house, but you don't need it.