|
| Back to Contents Page |
Home
Energy Index |
About
Home
Energy |
| Home Energy Home Page
| Back Issues of Home Energy |
Home Energy Magazine Online September/October 1997
LETTERS
HE Heat Pump Bias?
Your replies to the letters pointing out the problems
in your recent articles on geothermal heat pump performance missed the
mark. First, you didn't fully reply to Jim Maunder's letter ("Heat
Pump Comparison Flawed?" Mar/Apr '97, p. 3), which indicated that your
comparison of ground source heat pumps and electric-resistance heaters
was flawed. You simply recalculated to adjust for the fact that the electric-resistance
homes were superinsulated. But you were still comparing homes with central
heating systems to homes with individual room heating.
In "Do You Dig Ground
Source Heat Pumps?" (Nov/Dec '96, p. 33), Jeff Stein concluded that
some ground source heat pumps did not meet efficiency targets. However,
his conclusions were based on comparisons to noncentrally heated electric-resistance
homes in the extreme North, many (maybe all) with supplementary wood heat.
Similarly, in responding to John Livermore's
letter ("Give Heat Pumps Their Day in the
Sun," Mar/Apr '97, p. 3), you asserted that the EPA's report Space
Conditioning: The Next Frontier is based on simulations when heat pumps
perform to specifications and ducts don't leak. As the primary author of
that report, I know that the analysis assumed a duct leakage rate for all
types of energy systems. We wanted to isolate the comparative performance
of various electric, gas, and oil technologies by holding all other variables
constant. You make it sound like we pumped up the results for geothermal
by assuming a different value for the duct systems. Actually, we deliberately
disregarded the fact that, on the air-source side, there is an expected
degradation of performance due to mischarging and/or leaky charges (this
is not a problem with geothermal heat pumps, since the charge is hermetically
sealed in the factory). We also disregarded the additional annual maintenance
charges associated with gas-fired heat pumps, since we were not aware of
the servicing requirement at time of publication.
We don't claim that geothermal systems always
perform as advertised. Nevertheless, PV and passive solar advocates prefer
geothermal systems because of their low demand and friendly load shapes.
You have jumped to a negative conclusion about ground source heat pump
technology, showing a very strong negative bias.
Mike L'Ecuyer
Washington, D.C.
Editor's reply :
Mr. L'Ecuyer is correct in describing the problems of comparing heating
systems. However, Jeff Stein did in fact adjust energy use to reflect differences
in insulation levels. It's more difficult to adjust for differences in
inside temperatures, but Stein was able to confirm that the control houses
were warm because the inside temperatures were monitored and the occupants
were surveyed. The biggest factor affecting energy use is burning wood
in wood stoves. Fortunately, most of the control houses did not have wood
stoves or fireplaces, and the few that did were paid not to use them during
the monitoring period.
Invading Ants Go for the Foam
I will be re-siding my house sometime in the next
couple years, probably with vinyl, and I would really like to increase
the insulation levels at the same time. I had been thinking of using 1
or 2 inches of rigid foam board insulation under the siding, but I'm concerned
about carpenter ants.
I have a friend with a superinsulated house,
and he's had serious problems with carpenter ants nesting in the foam board.
Stressed-skin panel manufacturers often add borates
to the foam to reduce this problem, but I haven't heard of such a thing
for regular foam board insulation.
I live in a heavily wooded area, and I've already
had termites and carpenter ants do serious damage to the house. I don't
want to make my house even more inviting.
Carl Windnagle
Hudson, MA
Siding retrofitter Paul Fisette, author of
"Roofing and Siding Rehabs Get an Energy Fix"
(Nov/Dec '96, p. 25) responds: I don't think that there is an epidemic
of ant infestation in foam. However, it is a concern of mine. I have seen
several cases where carpenter ants have infested rigid foam insulation.
I've seen bags full of material that I thought was cellulose. After closer
inspection, I found that it was expanded polystyrene, destroyed by nesting
ants.
Ants nest in soft media and leave the nest
to forage for food. They nest in wet wood because it's soft and easy to
chew; foam is vulnerable for the same reason. If you do not have foam,
you most likely have another appealing nesting medium. For example, you
may get ant infestation in cellulose or fiberglass. The insulation can
be drastically compromised. Since the insulation is out of sight and out
of mind, the heat loss may never be visually detected.
Manufacturers of stressed skin panels do add
borates to their mix to discourage nesting, but I have not seen evidence
that they've been successful. And borates can leach out if your siding
leaks. I am also not sure that foam board with borates is readily available.
Given all the odds, I would still use foam
in a residing project. What are the alternatives? If you need to upgrade
your insulation, foam is often the best choice.
Showerhead Scores
In "The Toilets Conservationists
Like Best" (Mar/Apr '97, p. 9), there is one small correction we'd
like to point out in your report of the survey. We had decided not to provide
an average score index for the showerheads as you did, and treated all
the showerheads as basically the same product. The article suggested that
the Niagara showerhead stood apart from the rest in performance. That was
not our view.
Warren C. Liebold, Director of Conservation/Technical
Services
NYC Department of Environmental Protection
New York, NY
| Back to Contents Page |
Home
Energy Index |
About
Home
Energy |
| Home Energy Home Page
| Back Issues of Home Energy |
Home Energy can be reached at: contact@homeenergy.org
Home Energy magazine -- Please read our Copyright
Notice
|