Area Heaters - What Type To Buy?

Has anyone done a recent "study" that resulted in a determination of what type of area heater (ceramic, element, oil bath, kerosene, etc) is the most cost effective?

Electric are 100% efficient, non vented Kerosene 100% efficient. You must do your own study on your local energy costs, everyones area is different. For me in the midwest Ng is best.

I don't think I did a very good job phrasing the question. Surely there are significant differences among the various heaters. For example: it takes a 1000 kwh electric heater x hours to raise a 12 x 12 room one degree above 68 but only y minutes to maintain that new temperature. An oil bath heater would be different... more efficient I assume. Cost of energy isn't a factor in this example; just time. That speaks to efficiency. When cost enters the equations, the picture turns to effectiveness. That's a different issue.
A diesel tractor may be more effective at cutting vegetation than a Lawn Boy mower. However, it's not cost effective to cut my lawn with a John Deere.
"m Ransley" wrote in message

Electric are 100% efficient, non vented Kerosene 100% efficient. You must do your own study on your local energy costs, everyones area is different. For me in the midwest Ng is best.

John Gregory wrote:

I don't think I did a very good job phrasing the question. Surely there are significant differences among the various heaters. For example: it takes a 1000 kwh electric heater x hours to raise a 12 x 12 room one degree...

What's a 1000 kWh heater?
Nick

One that burns out after it's consumed 1000 kWh of energy, of course :>)
Gordon Richmond

Welp. Guess that means THAT one's not too efficient! :-)
"Gordon Richmond" wrote in message

One that burns out after it's consumed 1000 kWh of energy, of course :>)
Gordon Richmond

A corn stove or pellet stove is about 25% as costly to run as natural gas or electric. If you live near cheap corn, it is best. See the cornfuel group on Yahoo, and do searches on pellet and corn stoves.
All the best,
Ron Wagner

John Gregory a �crit :

Has anyone done a recent "study" that resulted in a determination of what type of area heater (ceramic, element, oil bath, kerosene, etc) is the most cost effective?

Your question really isn't very clear.
Are you asking about energy sources, energy diffusion or both?
And add a bit more information, because the local situation is important - the most cost effective heating for a 20m� spanish flat is nt going to be the same as the most cost effective for a 200 year old stone farmhouse in Denmark...

Mel

I dont understand you, maybe nor do you, 1500 watts is 1500 watts, all electric heat is 100% efficient. But you must compare your Kwh costs per btu to your other fuels for your area. for me electricity is still twice the price of Ng in the midwest.

I can see this isn't going to be easy and I'll accept responsibility for failure to make it clear. Let me try again. There's no trick question involved but there is a distinction to be made between efficiency and effectiveness. We're talking about the efficiency of a mechanical heater verse its cost effectiveness.

Assume an array of common mechanical heating devices available to the general public; electric heating element types, heating elements with ceramic whatever, heating elements that heat oil baths, heating elements accompanied with blowers, and whatever other type of space heaters are commonly available to the public for purchase ( I didn't know there were such things as a corn and a pellet heaters).

Assume further that a 12' x 12' room is at 68 degree Fahrenheit. Taking each machine separately (type of heater). with the same kwh rating, how long does it take to raise the room one degree? After reaching that temperature, how much run-time is used by that heater to maintain the temperature?

This would speak to the "efficiency" of the various heaters. Cost of operation has nothing to do with the equation; cost speaks to "cost/effectiveness" and that's not what we're measuring here.

Where I'm trying to go with this is to a conclusion that one type of heater is quicker than another in raising the temperature of a room a few degrees above a reasonably low level and keeping it there. I suspect that an oil bath space heater may take a tad longer (however long a "tad" is) to raise the temperature, however, it makes up for it's delay by lower run-times once the temperature is reached. That's a guess on my part. I've never seen nor heard of anyone or anything along the lines of such a test that could lead to a quantitative conclusion as opposed to the subjective kind everyone is prone to give.

Perhaps the answer is simple "no one here knows". and that's OK. Nothing lost.


"Mel" wrote in message John Gregory a �crit :

Has anyone done a recent "study" that resulted in a determination of what type of area heater (ceramic, element, oil bath, kerosene, etc) is the most cost effective?

Your question really isn't very clear.
Are you asking about energy sources, energy diffusion or both?
And add a bit more information, because the local situation is important - the most cost effective heating for a 20m� spanish flat is nt going to be the same as the most cost effective for a 200 year old stone farmhouse in Denmark...

Mel

John Gregory wrote:

Assume further that a 12' x 12' room is at 68 degree Fahrenheit. Taking each machine separately (type of heater). with the same kwh rating, how long does it take to raise the room one degree?

That depends on its thermal mass and insulation and the outdoor temp.
What's a "kWh rating"? :-)

After reaching that temperature, how much run-time is used by that heater to maintain the temperature?

That just depends on the room's insulation and the outdoor temp.

Where I'm trying to go with this is to a conclusion that one type of heater is quicker than another in raising the temperature of a room a few degrees above a reasonably low level and keeping it there. I suspect that an oil bath space heater may take a tad longer (however long a "tad" is) to raise the temperature, however, it makes up for it's delay by lower run-times once the temperature is reached. That's a guess on my part.

The last part seems incorrect.
Nick

That depends on its thermal mass and insulation and the outdoor temp.

You're missing the point, Nick. It's the RELATIVE differences that will lead to the answer of which is most efficient. It doesn't matter how long it really takes. What maters is which one rose the room one degree fastest then how much run-time did it take to maintain that temperature within - say - a span of one hour.

What's a "kWh rating"? :-)

Kilowatts used in one hour... the rating of element.

That just depends on the room's insulation and the outdoor temp.

As in the first instance, these aren't relevant. We're after the relative ratings again. Example: The heating element plus blower type ran for 30 minutes during a one hour period to maintain the temperature. By contrast, the oil bath heater ran only 20 minutes to maintain that temperature in the same room. Conclusion: The oil bath heater was more efficient (it used a heating element of the same rating as the other heater it competed against.)
I'm pretty sure at this point that no one has come across such a study.
wrote in message

John Gregory wrote:
Assume further that a 12' x 12' room is at 68 degree Fahrenheit. Taking each machine separately (type of heater). with the same kwh rating, how long does it take to raise the room one degree?
That depends on its thermal mass and insulation and the outdoor temp.
What's a "kWh rating"? :-)
After reaching that temperature, how much run-time is used by that heater to maintain the temperature?
That just depends on the room's insulation and the outdoor temp.
Where I'm trying to go with this is to a conclusion that one type of heater is quicker than another in raising the temperature of a room a few degrees above a reasonably low level and keeping it there. I suspect that an oil bath space heater may take a tad longer (however long a "tad" is) to raise the temperature, however, it makes up for it's delay by lower run-times once the temperature is reached. That's a guess on my part.
The last part seems incorrect.
Nick

What's a "kWh rating"? :-)

Kilowatts used in one hour... the rating of element.

Until you show that you know the difference between power and energy these guys will give you a hard time. ________ Andre' B.

"John Gregory" wrote in message

I can see this isn't going to be easy and I'll accept responsibility for failure to make it clear. Let me try again. There's no trick question involved but there is a distinction to be made between efficiency and effectiveness. We're talking about the efficiency of a mechanical heater verse its cost effectiveness.

Assume an array of common mechanical heating devices available to the general public; electric heating element types, heating elements with ceramic whatever, heating elements that heat oil baths, heating elements accompanied with blowers, and whatever other type of space heaters are commonly available to the public for purchase ( I didn't know there were such things as a corn and a pellet heaters).

You raise an interesting question. If I understand your question, you're looking for any information that compares different types of heaters and how well they distribute their output.
Ten 100 watt light bulbs put just as much heat energy into a room as a single 1000 watt heater. But how well it is distributed can determine which heating method can make the room more comfortable. The simplistic view is that since both put energy into the room at the same rate, there is no difference. But the more practical view looks at how well the heat gets distributed throughout, and how it's controlled.
Some heaters depend on natural convection currents to distribute the heat throughout the room, and so may not heat the room as evenly say as a heater equipped with a circulating fan. Some parts of the room could be hotter than the desired temperature long before other parts of the room warm up to the desired temperature.
I think such differences are more complex than just the heater itself. Placement in the room (low/high/inside-wall/outside-wall/center) would have a lot to do with things. And so would the placement of any thermometer and/or thermostat. A oil-bath type placed in the 'wrong' spot might have to run a lot more to make/maintain the room 'comfortable' than if the same heater is placed in the 'right' spot.
daestrom

That's why the Canucks invented two dollar coins.
"John Gregory" wrote in message

Welp. Guess that means THAT one's not too efficient! :-)
"Gordon Richmond" wrote in message One that burns out after it's consumed 1000 kWh of energy, of course :>)
Gordon Richmond