CH or gas fire?

I've asked this before, but some time ago. Living room gas fire is almost unused and I'm wondering whether this winter I should make more use of it, and limit use of CH as a way to save on gas consumption?

CH heats nine radiators, in nine spaces, all but one fitted with TRV's, with a compensated controller. Gas fire is an old triple radiant type giving a choice of 3 lit or just 1, and the place is well insulated.
The days of heating every radiator in the house are on the way out unless you are a footballer or royalty you will be wrapped in a blanket sat in front of the fire that you can't afford to turn on
 
Sponsored Links
The days of heating every radiator in the house are on the way out unless you are a footballer or royalty you will be wrapped in a blanket sat in front of the fire that you can't afford to turn on

Oh, I can afford it - just keen to do my bit in conserving gas.
 
No, that is dealt with by my compensating control system, which works very well indeed efficiency wise.
Maybe in your case but it is very likely to depend on when the original radiator set up was designed. Couple of comments off the web

Condensing mode requires a return temperature of 54°C or lower. So maximum system temperatures of 70°C supply and 50°C return are preferable or, to condense continuously, 50°C supply and 30°C return.

And from. As It has a bit more detail

A condensing boiler is a form of gas boiler that can work at a higher efficiency. Non-condensing gas boilers could lose up to 40% of the heat they generated via the flue, whereas condensing boilers can recover most of that heat by capturing it before it leaves the flue and re-cycling it to pre-heat the boiler.

Even this is a sliding scale however. At 54°C the boiler is 87% efficient (in perfect testing conditions). The boiler does not reach 90%+ efficiencies until the return temperatures are around 45°C. This means water must exit the boiler at a maximum of 65°C, impart 20°C of heat to the room via the radiators, and return at 45°C. This makes radiator balancing very important to ensure enough heat is given off to the room to lower the return temperature sufficiently.


It all ties in with radiator sizing for a given heating output at the radiator. What it means is that in some cases the boiler can be made to condense but radiator output may be reduced. The clue is the return temperature the system is running at. Lower is better but the gains drop off. it appears from specs very low may gain ~5%. However I don't think they quote true efficiencies. The above 87% may be a real one. :) Something I want to look into. All it means is that some can probably save by making sure the boiler does condense and using supplementary in say the lounge if needed.

I made some of the quoted stuff bold because it is important.
 
Maybe in your case but it is very likely to depend on when the original radiator set up was designed. Couple of comments off the web

Condensing mode requires a return temperature of 54°C or lower. So maximum system temperatures of 70°C supply and 50°C return are preferable or, to condense continuously, 50°C supply and 30°C return.

From memory, my boiler hits a maximum flow temperature of 60C, so I have no real concerns about improving the efficiency. Rather I was wondering if lowering the desired temperature on the stat for the entire house, and making more use of the living room gas fire, might be sensible move to conserve gas.
 
Sponsored Links
maximum flow temperature of 60C
The spec I found by searching the model number reckons 80 max. Usually there is no need to use that high a temp all year round even if it's needed to get the designed output from the radiators.
 
The spec I found by searching the model number reckons 80 max. Usually there is no need to use that high a temp all year round even if it's needed to get the designed output from the radiators.

I think maybe I limited it to 60 then, with 70 the limit when there is a call for HW.
 
British sheep farmers pay to have their sheep sheared and the wool taken away. The wool goes out of the country, mostly to China.

In the past the wool was very valuable as it was used for clothing. The wealth of many towns in Northern England came from wool. Now most of our clothes come from overseas. I'm pointing out what a ridiculous situation we are in when the sheep in the field at the end of your street could clothe you cheaply and adequately, but we throw it away and buy (often inferior) clothes from 1000s of miles away, and from countries hostile to us, instead.

It is yet another example of us giving away our country's riches. Gas, oil, electric, wool, you name it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
British sheep farmers pay to have their sheep sheared and the wool taken away. The wool goes out of the country, mostly to China.

In the past the wool was very valuable as it was used for clothing. The wealth of many towns in Northern England came from wool. Now most of our clothes come from overseas. I'm pointing what a ridiculous situation we are in when the sheep in the field at the end of your street could clothe you cheaply and adequately, but we throw it away and buy (often inferior) clothes from 1000s of miles away, and from countries hostile to us, instead.

It is yet another example of us giving away our country's riches. Gas, oil, electric, wool, you name it.
And when you find out natural gas is produced in Scotland and is exported instead of being used closer to home you have to wonder... WHO THE HELL IS IN CHARGE OF THIS CIRCUS???
 
And when you find out natural gas is produced in Scotland and is exported instead of being used closer to home you have to wonder... WHO THE HELL IS IN CHARGE OF THIS CIRCUS???
Not strictly true it is imports of LNG that is exported not our own gas so in todays market they are probably selling it for a lot more than they paid for it
 
Not strictly true it is imports of LNG that is exported not our own gas so in todays market they are probably selling it for a lot more than they paid for it
Not strictly true.
Gas from Scotland is exported when it could be used for Scotland
 
You claimed we "threw it all away". Make your mind up.
I think you are a little autistic and therefore not good with metaphor and nuance.

We effectively throw the wool away.

The main point (which you have missed) is that we are wasting our own cheap and abundant resources whilst enriching other countries.
 
I think you are a little autistic and therefore not good with metaphor and nuance.

We effectively throw the wool away.

The main point (which you have missed) is that we are wasting our own cheap and abundant resources whilst enriching other countries.
you don't like capitalism either do you ?

you seem to be a socialist who won't admit it, thinks he is a Conservative but doesn't accept he isn't .
 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top