ᐅ Infrared heating throughout the entire house?

Wandervogel85 schrieb:

I really don’t understand what you have against smaller houses. You always criticize them at every opportunity.

You’ll have to explain to me how you managed to read a dislike of small houses or even criticism of them from my posts :-(
On the contrary, I criticize when people design houses where each individual floor is already as large as their budget can barely allow overall.

---

https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/

Wandervogel85 schrieb:

I really don’t understand what you have against smaller houses. You criticize them at every opportunity.

My understanding is this:
He doesn’t have anything against small houses per se – rather, he objects to planning a house (in this case, reasonably modest in size) with features that are typically expected in larger homes, where the investment generally pays off proportionally to the floor area. A lot of technical equipment also means a large roof area and a big cold storage room. That creates some contradictions. As I have already mentioned, it seems like half the house is filled either with placeholder rooms or utility spaces.
Furthermore, the energy savings you achieve by taking a reasonable and ecological approach should also be used by more people.
If you look at it closely, you basically select a storage system sized for a certain number of people. Then you add a heating system that fits the household and daily needs. (Let’s leave out infrared heating for this translation, since @11ant was speaking more generally.)

To give a simpler example: it doesn’t make sense for a single person to install a family bathtub in their bathroom. Even if they enjoy bathing and occasionally have a second person join, the design should suit up to 2 people—not a corner bathtub for 4, with an additional shower installed just in case 3 people ever use it, and so on.
And then there is the question of necessity: why plan certain features as if building a new car, where the financial impact of extras like sports packages or ashtrays doesn’t matter—yet it’s questionable whether a Dacia really needs a Porsche engine.
Sure, you can do that, but it’s somewhat pointless. Just for the sake of having it?!

Bookstar schrieb:

Using an air-to-water heat pump is definitely "challenging." You don’t need an electric heating element either. But these heat pumps require ultra-low flow temperatures, especially with such a high desired room temperature; otherwise, your costs will skyrocket.

This requires proper planning. Nothing more, nothing less. It should be standard. And a normal flow temperature for a heat pump should not exceed 30°C (86°F) even in severe cold. It doesn’t work with 15cm (6 inches) underfloor heating loops following the motto “We’ve been doing it this way for 20 years.”

nordanney schrieb:

This requires proper planning. No more, no less. It should be standard. And a normal supply temperature for a heat pump should not exceed 30 degrees Celsius (86°F) even in Siberian cold. It doesn’t work with 15cm (6 inches) underfloor heating loops based on the idea “we’ve been doing it this way for 20 years.”

Yes, certainly that is the key with this technology, which simply has conceptual disadvantages compared to combustion-based heating systems. A heat pump will always fall short in terms of comfort; in my opinion, without a wood stove, you can forget about it. Then again, I also have a chimney and a chimney sweep... Good planning can only keep running costs somewhat manageable, assuming electricity prices don’t rise even further.

If heat pumps weren’t politically favored (like electric cars), they wouldn’t have become widespread.

Bookstar schrieb:

A heat pump will always fall short in terms of comfort; without a wood stove, you can basically forget about it in my opinion.

As always, what you say about heat pumps is nonsense. Comfort has nothing to do with the heat source. A wood stove is nice for coziness, but unnecessary as a heating source.

Bookstar schrieb:

If heat pumps weren’t politically favored (like electric cars), they wouldn’t have become so widespread.

… and they wouldn’t have been in use for 100 years, now commonly installed in new buildings. Nor as air conditioning units. These devices are not bad at all. And heat pumps are used everywhere (cars, dryers, etc.).

nordanney schrieb:

What you say about the heat pump is nonsense as usual. Comfort has nothing to do with the heat source. And having a wood stove in addition is nice for coziness, but unnecessary as a heating source.

It is nonsense to ignore technical characteristics and physical realities. Every degree higher of flow temperature costs a small fortune with a heat pump. Pellet heating systems don’t care at all. Higher flow temperature = faster responsiveness. Also, a differential of 24 degrees Celsius (43 degrees Fahrenheit) for the bathroom and lower for other rooms can be easily regulated with actuators in pellet systems. A heat pump is extremely sensitive in this regard and often causes many problems: either it doesn’t get warm enough, or the efficiency drops drastically. Then there is the issue of domestic hot water and the risk of legionella…