Nothing. I have an 8 unit building that is relying on heat pumps in New England. Tomorrow workers will start installing a solar thermal array to complement an existing solar PV array.
I'm doing it to minimize the growth of utility cost in the future. The only reason it's not wide spread is inertia and poorly informed consumers.
This only reason this works for me is a large investment in insulation.
Investing in insulation, renewable energy, and heat pumps. That is all it takes.
New builds here in Ireland for the last few years have been financially incentivised to use heat pumps to the point they basically all are, and there’s talk of making it mandated over fuel based heating systems
In Switzerland there is some neat established method for finding out the needed heating power. Consumption/year x Efficiency / 2000h/year = Max heating power. This should work for most moderate climates, although you should consult your local climate table. https://pubdb.bfe.admin.ch/de/publication/download/2781
Further even if you undersize your heat pump to only 70% of the max heating power, then you still will get out 99% from your heating from the heat pump on average.
Two things combined: uncertainty if the heat pump can handle cold regions making purchasing decisions much more difficult than with normal heating solutions which just work everywhere all the time. And that combined with the huge initial capital cost of in ground heat pump loops required in much of the country due to the cold winters.
This second, the large capital cost from ground excavation or drilling, etc, means heat pumps really only make sense and will see adoption in new houses, not existing houses. At least in places where it actually gets cold regularly. I expect much stronger adoption where simple above ground units are feasible.
FWIW I have a heat pump with natural gas backup installed in Washington state in 2016 and it's been great. As I recall even in 2016 there was no huge argument against it when you have to replace an existing natural gas furnace. Even in Washington it's nice to have AC and with a heat pump you get a more efficient furnace AND AC in one package.
Essays like this filled with AI-generated spew are really irritating. I hope these figures aren't hallucinations, but it jives with my own experience:
Ductless systems averaged around $29,000, but quotes ranged from under $20,000 to over $40,000. Ducted systems averaged $38,000, with bids spanning from under $25,000 to over $50,000—an astonishing 100% difference from low to high for both systems.
This is a non-starter for tens of millions of households. Not just the range, but the low end of the range, which approaches the cost of a new car. Lots of people will look at this, and say, "No thanks, I can get 2 or 3 window-mounted ACs at Walmart for a fraction of the price."
Four years ago when we got a heat pump/mini split the cost was at the low end of the range, but sweetened with a state loan program with 0% interest for the life of the loan. No brainer. I doubt those incentives exist in the current rate environment.
Original author here. Those figures are from a local study done last year by the Laminar Collective (linked to in the piece). They do not account for state or federal rebates/incentives. They're included to demonstrate the wide range of installation costs, which can feel arbitrary to a homeowner and undermine their confidence, thus making it less likely that they will choose to install a heat pump.
Comparing the cost of a heat pump to window AC units is missing the point since, as you're well aware, a heat pump provides both cooling and heating. A homeowner who is considering a heat pump is almost certainly replacing a gas furnace and/or a central AC system. When you factor in the cost of replacing two systems with one, plus higher effiency gains/lower operating costs, and money back on rebates, heat pumps can be cost competitive.
Massachusetts (where this study was done) is still offering generous incentives as well as 0% financing through the Mass Save program.
The pros for heat pumps are numerous. There is the issue of resilience to extreme weather. ASHRAE is funding a project, just getting underway, to create a map, first of the USA but anticipated to be expanded to worldwide, of heat pump resilience in the face of an expected change in the frequency of extreme events. Those wanting to learn more:
We're not replacing our central, forced-air propane furnace because of unreliable electricity. We have stretches where our electricity is out for 1-10 days at a time. That tends to correlate with times when our daily high temperatures are below freezing. The outages are typically caused by trees falling after several feet of snow fall on them before a windstorm finishes them off. We're in rural mountains in Northern California.
We have whole-house backup batteries, which we can charge with a generator for longer outages (we also have solar in summer, but the sun doesn't get above the trees in the winter). The batteries/generator would have to be much bigger to replace that furnace with a heat pump. They will power the propane furnace (mainly the forced-air part). About 1/3 of our heating is firewood, but during deep cold spells, it's hard to keep it above ~55°F in rooms other than the one with the fireplace without help from the furnace.
We do plan to install a mini-split system before too long, and use that when we do have electricity, relegating the central propane furnace to power outages. We already use an evaporative cooler for cooling, which uses far less electricity than AC. We'll only use the AC function of the mini-splits when we have a lot of smoke from wildfires in the area (evaporative coolers blow in lots of outside air).
More practical to insulate and just paint your siding and roof white than replace your already existing/working AC. Immediate cooling benefits and no loan hanging over you for X years. Most people have not budgeted or saved for any infrastructure improvements though, so either is a hard sell.
No homeowner is going to replace a functioning system. No one is arguing for that. But furnaces and central ACs don't last forever, so when one of them goes, there's an opportunity for the homeowner to consider a more comfortable, efficient, safer, and healthier alternative (that is also better for the planet).
Not sure if it’s the fact that I live in the rust belt, but pretty much every provider tried to dissaude me and said they would have to refer me to someone else when I tried to get one quoted last year. They said it’s not an ideal solution for the area, which seems to contradict everyone online that claims heat pumps are awesome.
20 comments
[ 5.4 ms ] story [ 38.6 ms ] threadI'm doing it to minimize the growth of utility cost in the future. The only reason it's not wide spread is inertia and poorly informed consumers.
This only reason this works for me is a large investment in insulation.
Investing in insulation, renewable energy, and heat pumps. That is all it takes.
although you'll get heatwaves sometimes, it's not worth it overall.
similarly, although these may be more efficient than what you already have, it costs money upfront to install new stuff. money people don't have.
Further even if you undersize your heat pump to only 70% of the max heating power, then you still will get out 99% from your heating from the heat pump on average.
This second, the large capital cost from ground excavation or drilling, etc, means heat pumps really only make sense and will see adoption in new houses, not existing houses. At least in places where it actually gets cold regularly. I expect much stronger adoption where simple above ground units are feasible.
Ductless systems averaged around $29,000, but quotes ranged from under $20,000 to over $40,000. Ducted systems averaged $38,000, with bids spanning from under $25,000 to over $50,000—an astonishing 100% difference from low to high for both systems.
This is a non-starter for tens of millions of households. Not just the range, but the low end of the range, which approaches the cost of a new car. Lots of people will look at this, and say, "No thanks, I can get 2 or 3 window-mounted ACs at Walmart for a fraction of the price."
Four years ago when we got a heat pump/mini split the cost was at the low end of the range, but sweetened with a state loan program with 0% interest for the life of the loan. No brainer. I doubt those incentives exist in the current rate environment.
Comparing the cost of a heat pump to window AC units is missing the point since, as you're well aware, a heat pump provides both cooling and heating. A homeowner who is considering a heat pump is almost certainly replacing a gas furnace and/or a central AC system. When you factor in the cost of replacing two systems with one, plus higher effiency gains/lower operating costs, and money back on rebates, heat pumps can be cost competitive.
Massachusetts (where this study was done) is still offering generous incentives as well as 0% financing through the Mass Save program.
https://www.ashrae.org/file%20library/technical%20resources/...
We have whole-house backup batteries, which we can charge with a generator for longer outages (we also have solar in summer, but the sun doesn't get above the trees in the winter). The batteries/generator would have to be much bigger to replace that furnace with a heat pump. They will power the propane furnace (mainly the forced-air part). About 1/3 of our heating is firewood, but during deep cold spells, it's hard to keep it above ~55°F in rooms other than the one with the fireplace without help from the furnace.
We do plan to install a mini-split system before too long, and use that when we do have electricity, relegating the central propane furnace to power outages. We already use an evaporative cooler for cooling, which uses far less electricity than AC. We'll only use the AC function of the mini-splits when we have a lot of smoke from wildfires in the area (evaporative coolers blow in lots of outside air).