I'm glad you're happy with your new equipment, you invested a lot of time and effort in the project.

If your savings in months of heavy usage don't provide enough of an excess, when you factor in having a net cost in months of lighter usage (as you saw in December) you'll likely be in a net cost position each year. That's perfectly fine if you're happier with how it operates compared with before. Whatever savings comes from system efficiencies will continue after the loan is paid off and you could be net positive at a later date.

Other than in cases of really old equipment or houses in dire need of modernization, or places with extreme weather, it can be hard to get a positive economic return from optional heating/cooling improvements. I think it's better to think of this area as a cost (in any event), and make improvements that change or improve performance to be how you want it to be. When you can do that, the cost is justified.

Good luck

has comfort improved?

how long until you pay off equipment/upgrades?

best of luck

I think the indoor humidity is higher this winter, didn't get the dry sore throat I usually get in early winter when the heat starts up. I love being able to take a hot bath in my big tub after both boys just finished showers. And my son is glad he can shower without waiting after I've just filled the tub. The comfort was never really an issue before, except for the dryness. We keep the stat on 67 during the day, sometimes I'm home and it drops to 66 or 59.9 before it kicks it on I get chilly, but that would be with any system.

I was happy when the news was reporting how busy the hvac companies were during last weeks cold, knowing that my furnace "should" not break down because it's new, vs the worry of my old system.

It's 10 years to pay it off at $83/mth, but as I said, it's no interest so I don't care how it is as long as its doesn't die before then. Plus I have the carrier 10 year parts and labor.

I'm pleased.

For a better historical comparison look up the heating degree days for your area rather than using what ever temperature figure you were using.

Air is not as dry? How did that happen, are the ducts or house better sealed now so you have less air leakage?

Your old furnace was 90% eff so it was fairly new? How long have you owned ur house? Did u buy former furnace?

Using one month of energy usage can be misleading. You need to look at the usage over a full year. You also can't look at the dollar amounts since the rates fluctuate each year.

You keep your thermostat low in the winter. A good southern exposure on a sunny day could be enough to keep your house at 67 degrees when the sun is up. This will also affect the amount of gas usage.

I don't see how the changes you made would decrease electricity use in the winter. There is something else going on to have caused the drop in electricity usage.

Glad to hear you are happy with your new HVAC system.

I don't see how the changes you made would decrease electricity use in the winter.

air sealing.

comparing electric rates will help to track savings.
once you have a full year of bills & rates, you'll
have a better idea of savings.

but enjoy what you've achieved.

there are some things we are curious about though.

best of luck

Energy Rater,

Can you elaborate on your response about air sealing?

sure Mike,
I'm not a big fan of analogies, because I
find that all too often people use them to
misdirect. But, when I first got into this business
this was the analogy that was the light bulb moment
for me.
It is easier to heat/cool a tight box than a leaky box.

pretty simple isn't it.
so take a minute to think about it.
if the house is 2000 sq ft living space and
has an air leakage measurement of 2000 cfm
(cubic feet of air per minute) it is a pretty
tight house. but if the air infiltration is
4000 cfm...there is a lot of leakage.

people often assume that their homes are tight
with little air leakage. but until you test the
house to measure the leakage & identify where
the leaks are...its a wag.
blower door testing shows where & how much leakage
exists.
our worst leakage site is to the attic.
(not the front door!) attic temps are very extreme,
and when this extreme temp air enters the house
it brings dust, insulation particles & the attic temps
that you then pay to condition.

if you are only conditioning the air in the living
space, it is easier, and affordable.
sealing the air leakage has a very short roi, because the
benefits are fast & long lasting.

the next area that saves quickly, and improves
indoor air quality is duct leakage.

mastic sealing ductwork, plenum to equipment
connections, return air chases & supply boxes
to ceiling..(or walls or floors depending on
the location of ducts)these things put the
air you pay to condition into the house.
otherwise this air leaks into unconditioned
spaces. attic..crawlspace & basement.
note mastic seal..not aeroseal, not duct tape or
foil tape. mastic & mastic tape. you want
something affordable that seals all leaks
and lasts for a long time. mastic sealing
has 30+ year life.

I've been blower door testing & duct testing
homes for a long time. it is highly unusual to
find tight existing homes. same for ductwork.
install, not air sealing is the focus of the
trades people.
slowly both builders & hvac installers are
understanding..but it isn't common.

until designers & architects start designing
putting the ductwork inside the conditioned space
at a time when it is the cheapest & easiest to do
(design time) we will pay for putting our ducts
& equipment in extreme areas.

small things..recessed lights are a huge deal.
not only for the amount of air they bring in
from the attic, but the way they effect the indoor
air quality.
IC can lights are designed so that
insulation can be installed next them.
the housing of the IC can has holes.
not only do these holes de-rate the R-value of the insulation, but they bring in attic air, and insulation particles.

a simple thing is to only use ICAT recessed lights.
(insulation contact Air Tight)
retrofitting each IC
light to air tight..costly &/or labor intensive.

doing it right to start with..and realizing that
efficiency costs are upfront..and long term is where
we need to be investing.

I'll step off my soap box now!
if you need clarification, just post.

best of luck

Energy Rater,

I agree with everything you stated. The part I am struggling with is a reduction of 135KwH of electricity use during the winter in a house which uses natural gas for fuel. I believe there is some savings due to the furnace blower running less now that the house is tighter. But I think that number is small in this situation.

The electricity reduction is 13%. If we want to figure out if lower blower consumption is responsible, we should start with an estimate of what the blower part might be as a percentage of the total electric power consumption. If a blower uses 1000 W and it on a little less than half the time in the winter, that is 10 kWh/day or 300 kWh/month.

135/300 is nearly half the energy for a blower if my numbers are right so that seems like the wrong way to go. Oh the other hand, if half the 135 is due to other factors, the blower could be a significant contributor.

Is my number for the blower high, or run time too long? Please fix it if it is.

I think Cindy's furnace has a multi speed 1HP motor which is the equivalent of 746W at full speed. Her old furnace probably had the same motor, but it was a single speed.

Let's assume the average power between high and low stages is 500W. Cindy likes keeps the house cold (67 degrees), so I think a run time of 5 hours of day is generous.

So the calculation is:
500W * 5 hours * 30 days = 75KWHr per month total

Now you have to estimate what the old furnace consumed. This gets to be hard since the old furnace was rated at 126K BTU at 90% vs. the new at 100K BTU at 96%. The old furnace may have used about the same electric power, but ran for shorter periods of time.

In summary there may be a small about of savings of electricity in the winter, but I think it is a fraction of the total usage.

In other words, the blower usage could not come close to saving that kind of power, especially since blower run time might have increased with a lower capacity furnace.

Cavell, house will be 18 in may. I guess we were pioneers on the high efficiency. I think we are the only one, or one of very few in our neighborhood that upgraded. It cost us $800 to upgrade back then.

Ionized. They air sealed the attic, all penetrations etc into attic and also did a little in the basement, around the 3 windows and the rim. Nothing dramatic done, just some orange goo on the spaces, and added about r19 blown cellulose in attic.

Heating degree days were 851 per this bill, last January they were 859 for the month of Jan in southern NJ per www.ncdc.noaa.gov.

the electric could be due to one week (on this bill)of LED Xmas light vs regular lights? Maybe 300 lights or so? That is possibly it. Imwouldnhave to check how many lights we replaced. New tv is 165 watts less power than old one, and it's on 5 hours day or more.

This blower does seem to run lower at times, perhaps that is first stage. Don't know if it uses less electric in stage 1. We do have southern exposure in the front which helps.

I'm just happy to see some savings! I am anxious to see how much did the air sealing and 16 seer ac makes.

LED x-mas lights could be $10 savings for sure. Furnace efficiency could be $10. The furnace blower will use less electricity in stage I. I don't know your model but most newer motors are going to be more efficient to move the same amount of air.