In direct response to your subject line (and ignoring all conversation that has followed):

I retro-fitted underfloor radiant heat in the first floor of my house in 2007. I chose to use a hydronic system with an electric "fired" boiler. Why didn't I simply install direct-electric radiant and cut out the hydronic middle-man?

By inserting the hydronic middle-man, I have decoupled my heat source from my heat delivery. I can generate heat with electricity, propane, wood, oil, heat-pump (or anything else which will generate heat) without changing the way that heat is delivered to my floor. When I installed it, electricity was (by far) my least expensive heat source. As energy costs change, I can change where to get my heat. Had I gone with direct-electric radiant, I would have no flexibility as energy costs change.

John Thurston
Juneau, Alaska

I am no manufacturer, installer, seller or expert of hydronic or electric heating, just an ordinary home end-user of an under-joist radiant hydronic zoned system by a gas-fired boiler installed new when building the house 11 years ago.

Why picked radiant type? thought it is more comfortable which turns out to be very true ( had electric baseboards before ).

why picked hydronic? natural gas was a little cheaper then, but now going rhru the roof and whole house electric mat type was virtually non-existent and unavailable in my area.

From what I know now ( from current use and a lot of good info on this forum ), what would I do if I were to build again? If radiant again, never do under-joist with simple controls. but then with all sorts of concerns and worries about maintenance and replacement from a good efficient system ( which should consist a few sophisticated and complicated controls and parts ) in short and long term with a hefty initial set-up and acquisition cost, I'd go with gas furnace with heat pump and forego the comfort and luxury of floor heat.

PS. I would still use electric for lightings or everything else that uses electricity until I am convinced there's a better way to power up this laptop of mine to type this nonsense for instance.

Dear Injuneau,
If you feel good in having advantage of able to change heat source at any time ( although I doubt you would excercise that option atall as you would have to change the boiler to do so and if you already have a boiler which is working Ok , I doubt you would consider spending bucks to buy another one) then no problem. You have spent huge amount in installing hydronics . In that also you have chosen an electric boiler.
If you are happy with your dissision there is no problem . If the money is spent and it brings sense of joy or happyness then it a good spent.

but as you all know about what is happening to fossil fuels .it is fast diminishing and costs are fast increasing . If you consider ratio (Electricity cost)/(Fossil fuel cost) what you think will hapen to this ration in the future .. will it go up or come down.
fossil fuel costs are going up and there is no reason it will go down in the near future. Electricity is mainly produced by fossil fuels only hence its cost will also go up.
but Now there are many renewable electricity generation sources fast emerging, like Hydro, solar, wave, wind, nuclear etc. As more and more of electricity is produced using renewable sources the cost of electricity will come down. and hence the ratio will come down.

Dear Al,
I hope you will take another look at electric and as you have already decided not to do simple under-joist system. With more sophesticated hydronic systems comes more complicated circutry and more maintenance.
Much better control and zonning can be achieved using underfloor electric systems. as it has very simple system but you can control and zone the entire system much more smoothly and easily.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Tefkot_Gunjan:
If you feel good in having advantage of able to change heat source at any time ( although I doubt you would excercise that option atall as you would have to change the boiler to do so and if you already have a boiler which is working Ok , I doubt you would consider spending bucks to buy another one) [QUOTE]

It all depends on energy costs. When I installed, electricity was the least expensive way to generate heat in Juneau. This was even before factoring the start-up and maintenance costs of a fossil fueled boiler. Next winter, my electricity may cost me four times what it did when I made my initial decision. Buying, installing and operating an oil boiler may have as little as a single-year payback if that happens.

[QUOTE]You have spent huge amount in installing hydronics .[QUOTE]
You have no idea what I spent, so please don't make wild assumptions. The majority of the expense was in time spent working with insulation. That expense remains the same regardless of how the heat is delivered through the floor or where the heat comes from.

[QUOTE]but as you all know about what is happening to fossil fuels .it is fast diminishing and costs are fast increasing . If you consider ratio (Electricity cost)/(Fossil fuel cost) what you think will hapen to this ration in the future .. will it go up or come down.[QUOTE]

This depends on how the electricity is generated. You are, again, assuming my energy costs fit within your cost model.

When I installed my heating system, my electricity came from a hydro plant. Right now, we are cut off from our hydro plant and our electricity is being generated by burning fossil fuels. This costs me five times what the hydro-generated electricity cost me. If my electricity continues to be generated by fossil fuel, it will be much more efficient and less expensive for me to heat my house by burning the fuel in a new boiler than it will be to pay the power company to burn it for me. Since I use water to move the heat into my house, I have the option of choosing a different heat source. Had I installed direct-electric heat, I would have no options but to by my heat from the electric company.

I stand with my original statement and will expand on it: Decoupling the heat source from the heat delivery mechanism is a good thing and that is why I am "obsessed" with hydronic.

John Thurston
Juneau, Alaska

Let's be real though Juneau, how often does an avalanche take out your high voltage towers? You are without a doubt, an exception to the rule and I feel for you and all the others effected by it. On the other hand, I would feel the same if you were using oil.

How long do they expect to be out of service? Is the power authority able to work on them yet?

john's situation is unique. just like everyone else's

point being; none of us are soothsayers. the last time oil got expensive, everyone said electricity was all we would ever use again too; that obviously did not happen.

electricity has a lot of good points; we've talked about most of them. BUT:

-Material cost on full size systems is not really one of them from the pricing I've seen bandied about;

-and future energy flexibility is a real concern for a lot of people. That is a sane and reasonable standpoint.

Personally I think cheap energy.. not just liquid fossil fuels... is coming to a close. as such, I personally don't think straight resistance heating OR fossil fuels will "win" in the end. If electric resistance is the cheapest heat we can get, you're going to see a lot of 50 degree houses because we've already seen what it cost when it wasn't the only game in town. that's going to be one ugly situation.

but solar assisted heating (not feasible with electric, if you're sane), geo, wood boilers, pellet boilers, cogen, off peak electric thermal storage, these are all methods that can be employed as energy gets more expensive.

..Just not with electric resistance heating, which depends on the metered kwh rates not climbing sky high as more and more people depend on it for things fossil fuel used to handle directly. Or a massive upswing in solar photovoltaic panel technology.

Guys: stick to your dependability, ease of installation, labor saving arguements. Lots of good points in there. But you're going to lose any arguement about predicting the future, every time. Because you offer one option, and hydronics offers them all.

quote:

but solar assisted heating (not feasible with electric, if you're sane)

Why do you say that? Well, maybe that's true in Maine but I have several PV clients who are very happy with their systems. The 3 I have in New York even had 1/2 of their costs covered by NYSERDA and the Feds. One of them is 2 years into a 6 year payback. He's not off the grid, nor would I suggest him to be, but his array makes it and he sells it back and is credited back from the grid for what he generates.

You're right, I was wrong; solar ASSISTED heating is feasible, I'm sorry.

while i was typing that, I was thinking about fully sized PV systems, not "assistance", to meet full heating loads. That would be gigantic and unlikely to be feasible for most homes given current PV technology. But you can throw a few panels up to help out, sure.

The market still dictates common construction practices.

Juneau is EXACTLY right and not at all unique unless getting your electric power from hydro along with 7% of the nation is unique. Decoupling delivery from heat source is an intelligent strategy and all arguments to the contrary are specious and self-serving, given the current and projected cost of electricity.

As new nuclear power plants (currently the only viable clean alternative to fossil fuels) are a good 15 years away, it doesn't make sense that you can burn one fuel to make another, while suffering a 60% efficiency loss and make the latter cheaper to buy. If this is not the case where you are, YOU are in a unique, albeit temporary, situation just as Juneau was.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuel_power_plant
http://money.cnn.com/2007/09/11/news/economy/power_prices/index.htm
http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/energy/2007-08-09-power-prices_N.htm

If I were selling electric heat exclusively, I would stick to the junk science or quit the argument while just behind.

MA

I have been reading this exchange for awhile. I Install, design and repair most types of systems. I don't folow the logic in the scorched air system being better. I have shown my builders by the time you pay for zoning scortched air heating, paying for the fact that air caries less heat molecules than water, and the building considerations of building around ducts, (this is a vary major consrtuction cost between labor and materials not to mention how it looks. Dropped ceilings etc.)
I agree to some extent with the elect. versions of radiant, hear in Steamboat Springs, Co. propane and elect. are the same cost. Tell me I'm wrong but the up front cost are quite substantial also. The cost to bring in a large enough service needs to be added. In the mountains they charge an arm and a leg to up grade a service. Most areas were set up with 200 amp services only. The average size of home here is nearing 6000 sqft. Electric is not 'that' versital to do a large home. Add to the fact that heating through carpets would be difficult. As to the statements to the hydronic radiant initial high cost for set up there are ways to manage that also. Refer to John Siegenthaler's aticle inFeb. PM amg. Systems can be made sympler. I have been to multple seminars with the european boys and they do their systems more this way. with good manufactured manifolds you can fine tune EACH loop for the tempurature you want. Get manifolds with flow controls and you can get a simple infrared gun and set each one. this is the best way as no one can put exactly the same number of feet in each lopp or gaurantee one loop doesn't have a slightly tigheter bend causing restrictions. With the great controls most modcons come with you can cut out most controls. You can put a zone valve on each loop if you desire. Take almost the same amount of wire as a tstat home run. for the same cost as GOOD staple up with panels, (with as cold as it gets here it is a real crap shoot not to use panels) you can use an above floor system. We like the Roth system. This put the aluminum above the floor. I figure under floor panels and Roth's system at $7.50 a sqft. installed. My customers are so pleased with the systems. The heat is faster than forced air, much cheaper to run than even pex in gypcrete. The temperatures are more forgiving, (very hard to stiping when viewed by an infrared camera. Bet re-think your system if you are.) Roth has a large up front cost but a quick pay back. I tell my customers if you could save $100 per month on thier heat bill would you pay $30 more per month on your mortgage.
Back to the elect. I have it in my bath room, and I love it. I looked at doing in my living room under my hardwood floors. This could be a choice for some in spot areas. One reason the first fellow got lower heat bills is the same with the Roth system the heat is right there at your feat. You feel warmer. This would be a crap shoot, I think in every house. As mentioned you can size the best system and different factors play into how well that system works. (A prevailing wind on a large window, different ground temperatures from one lot to the next. Was any insulation missed. Is there a draft in the foundtion, around a window. From my early IBR classes they claim a 1/4 hole passes a many BTUs as a open window.) from ground movement has one opened up? No 2 house will heat the same. I like the elect. radiant for the same reason as hydronic, hopefully the cost will come down and even better the cost and effiency of Photovoltaic. Might realy work well then. (I hear one is coming into design now, hope so.)
Sorry for the lenght this is a passion I could go on for ever. (By the way change out commercial cast iron boilers on these large home regularly and install modcons. My customer on the last one in a month has used 90% less propane than the month before.

Dear MA,
you said:-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
As new nuclear power plants (currently the only viable clean alternative to fossil fuels) are a good 15 years away
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I totally disagree with this comment of yours. This show you are unaware of the different renewable options available in the market at present and what is the trend for the renewable energy.
The are so many different Renewable energy sources like, wave, geothermal, Solar , wind etc apart from newclear.
If you will try to find out a bit about wind energy and solar energy you will be amazed to know how fast they are growing .
At present the common cheap solar cells are 15% efficient ( the costlier efficient ones have around 22% efficiency).The reason being that they are able to harness only the visible spectrum of light and the invisible spectrum is not utilized. Now there has been a major breakthrough in the solar cell technology and now it is possible to use the invisible spectrum ( ultraviolet and infrared) also and this will increase the efficiency greatly. Also solar inks have been developed and you can prepare photovoltaic cell by just screen printing that ink on some surface. hence the cost will be much less. with this the major breakthrough is on the verge in Solar electric technology .
The wind energy is silently increasing its energy generation share without notice and you will be amazed to see how fast it is growing. The wind turbines are becomming smaller and more efficient and cheaper. Now many comapnies are selling small wind electricity generation for residential use at very low costs.check prices of this company ( http://www.freetricity.com/howmuch.htm ) , this will give you an idea of where the wind energy is heading. If you will google on wind energy then you will see how fast it is growing and products are becomming cheaper and affordable each day.
Infact many companies are comming up with hybrid products which combine both wind and solar to generate electricity. In the future you will see people installing these systems and get free electricity from these to compensate most of there requirements . Hence you can just install radiant resistance electric system connect it with this free energy and reap the benifits.
Electricity is heading in the right direction, we have to just check the different renewable options available and we will see that we had many options which are much cleaner greener and cheaper. But most of the options which give us hope of cheaper energy are electric.

that's true. and when we're not hoping anymore... when all of these promises we've all heard for 30 years regarding wind, solar, and other alt energy electric generation methods come true... we'll be having a very different discussion about this. edit: provided that it's not cost effective to do PV or wind powered geothermal exchange of course

But that day is not today. Today, it isn't even remotely cost effective to fully heat your house on electricity garnered from solar or wind.

and no matter how effective solar PV gets, it will never get as effective as thermal solar can get, which is a much lower energy transfer. it might get effective enough, sure. and it might not.

Yes you are right that solar thermal is more effective than PV but using solar thermal . you cannot use solar thermal in small scale to generate electricity . Yes big power stations are comming up based on solar thermal which has a big and deep well whose inner walls are black to create a black hole . big reflective dishes are used to send solar rays into this black hole and the energy is absorbed by the well and then used in creating electricity. Big power plants based on this technology are comming up.

Here is the scenerio I see. You use renewables for your main heat with electric radiant in critical areas (baths,Kitchens)and suppliment on the days you need a boost. We have seen even spot heating where in the main sitting room of the house the low mass electric radiant is used to elevate the temp. to comfortable levels. I think these 6000 sq. foot houses that are currently kept at 72 deg. for 24 hours regardless of occupancy is waste that is not needed. By elevating the occupied rooms energy can be saved regardless of the fuel.JMHO

Morgan,
you are absolutely right, the present trend of keping the whole house at an elevated temperature is actually wasting too much energy which can be saved easily by prudent zoning and using that zoning.
This wastage is more in biger houses .
We will be seeing the scenario discribed by you of combining renewable energy with actual grid energy more frequently in the comming years. Renewable elecric energy will be the main source and when more energy requirement is there then grid electricity will supliment the renewable energy. this scenario will be occuring in more and more houses in the comming future.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Tefkot_Gunjan,