Money or better for the environment?

Money - buy the cheapest system you can - obviously environment is a different story.

Your energy costs are so low as to make any more efficient system pay for itself pretty impossible. The seer 16 will absolutely never pay off. A hybrid system may payoff after many years but hard to say.

Are you saying you pay $.58 a therm? I pay $1 and it should be pretty standard around the country like gasoline. I mean there is some variability and some taxation difference but $.58 seems really low. But then again $.05 for KWH is less than 1/2 the national average - usually you only get those rates if you live next to a large hydroelectric system. You definitely need to make sure that those numbers include all costs.

Usually with sort of average numbers - $1 per therm and $.10 per kwh with a seer 16 HP at 40 degrees, you probably save 20% with a heat pump. Since your numbers have a ratio about the same as average, your savings should be the same percentage. Now - there are a lot of assumptions in that 20% - about a COP of 3.5 - you may get more like a 4 at 40 degrees with a seer 16.

I think it is probably true that NG will be more variable in price than electricity and we are sitting at pretty low prices right now. NG was at least 50% higher recently, and that makes a heat pump much cheaper.

I think that converting the fleet of large trucks in the US to NG makes sense and is slowly happening. This will probably drive NG prices up over time. Electricity has so many ways of being produced that it will probably stay stable and lower. But hey - who the heck knows. Mandated renewable generation may drive electricity prices way up as well as carbon taxes or other coal penalties.

In many climates, more heat pumps allow a more even use of electricity. This is less environmentally damaging that increasing peak use. IE - you may have hydroelectric and in the winter (particularly at night), those electrons may literally be sitting around with nothing to do. Much better to use that than NG which could be used for transport.....

dual fuel is the way to go. You won't regret it.

A heat pump can keep a well insulated house warm down to surprisingly low temperatures if its sized right.

If either gas or electric costs spike you will have flexibility with dual fuel.

Todays new heat pumps usually use scroll compressors which are simpler and more reliable than ever. Its not uncommon for heatpumps that are run alot to last many years. Nearly as many or as many as straight A/C.

Dual-fuel doesn't have to be that expensive. A heat pump doesn't cost much more than straight A/C. It requires additional controls and thats it.

I have a 90% natural gas furnace with a 15 seer heatpump.

16 seer might be a little overkill. 2-stage are good for humid parts of the country that need lots of a/c.

dabbindad

post complete mdl numbers of condenser, evap coil, and furnace and any other details or aux equipment included in quote.

what is your location?

IMO

thanks for the responses. i got the cost figures off the g and E bills. the $5.86 figure is for 1000 cu. ft.gas.
what about the issue of wear on the compressor to ask it to do 75% of the heating/cooling. the high eff. gas furnace would have minimal use with it being the least mechanical device.
i believe the carrier system will allow me to choose to use the heat pump or not, so it would give future flexibility to have.
carrier infinity furnace: 58mvc060-10114
carrier coil:cnpvp3617apa
carrier performance heat pump: 25 hpa636
aprilaire filter cabinet rp2410
carrier humidifier #sbp
condensate pump (outdoor drain freeze likely)
infinity thermostat

i'm thinking of the carrier 24APA7 a/c unit instead of heat pump, due to less complex unit and better balance of wear on a mechanical part. i think the upfront cost savings on the ac vs pump will only be $200, but i'm not thinking so much of cost or efficieny but of reliability. we will be in the home for 5-10 more years.
if the mechanical parts of the heat pump are the same as the ac (just electronic control difference) and i can decide to use it or not, then the heat pump makes sense for future flexibility.

we are bid $6700 after rebate and tax credits for the carrier. basic lennox, temptstar systems have been bid at the low to mid $5000 range. no rebate and partial tax credits.

beginning to wonder if i'm making this too hard.

dabbindan

that's alot of firepower on the heating side. what is your location?

post back.

IMO

david,
with reguard to better for the environment, i feel like we are doing it already in the topeka ks climate.
we are getting the energy costs as described above with our current 60% furnace and a 9 seer ac (according to the estimators guesses). with our energy habits and a new system say the minimal 80% furnace 13seer ac ( i am shooting for a 95%/16seer system), i'd say our carbon footprint is better than 95% of my neighbors even if we don't get a heat pump.

this is the furnace the carrier salesman is pushing. top of the line. i asked about the next step down (Infinity 96 Gas Furnace Model: 58MVB) and he says they don't stock it. i'm not real tickled with this guy. he suggested i was letting the internet (carrier site) confuse me when i wanted to understand more about the humidity control features. that didn't sit well with me. i suggested it was his job to help me how a $6000+ investment was going to work.
that being said, my wife has a sensitive sinus system (alliteration anyone?) and easy humidity control is a plus. i was just trying to see if the lower end systems would let us control humidity at the thermostat.
for the apparent $1400 difference between the middle system and the high end with humidity control, i am willing to spring for it.
just wondering about the pump/ac choice, but as i said if i can choose to use and the mechanicals are the same, then i guess his $6700 system is fine.
just haven't liked his attitude.

i mentioned our topeka ks location two posts up, but forgot to include it in my response to you tigerdune. so here it is. :^)

Your total annual heating cost is $298. You are going to get a 95% efficient furnace. How much less would the cost be if you got an 80% furnace?

I am simply a homeowner so please don't take my question as thinking you are making a wrong choice. :-)

the entry level system estimates of 80% furnace and 13 seer ac are coming in around $5300-$5500(lennox, tempstar) (not eligible for manu. rebate or gov. tax credit) and because of a $1200 carrier rebate and $1500 tax credit for the high end systems, the cost difference is just $1300-$1500.
the nearly top or the line carrier is being bid at $6700.

for the extra we hope to get: the top tier energy cost efficiency (not too important as out energy costs are already low) control of humidity year round at the thermostat, and the ability to dial in a heat pump if gas costs rise compared to electric. also, making as small a environmental impact as possible for the next 20-30 years.

that is if 1) i can choose to use the heat pump when i want
2)the mechanical aspect of the heat pump is essentially the same as a ac only unit.
phew! getting long winded, but i have been thinking about this intensely the last few days. plus i'm laid up on the couch with a broken foot and my social contacts have been reduced. lol.

I'll chime with my 2 cents here. Since it sounds like you are so concerned about reliability and your energy costs seem so low, why aren't you considering an 80% furnace paired with a heat pump? 80% furnaces are tried and true, while the high eff ones require new PVC pipes be run for air intake and exhaust (i.e. you can't use your existing flue). You hear people talking about condensation issues with those high eff furnaces. While the problems may be overblown, it's still a reliability concern over an 80% furnace. And considering your energy costs, dropping from 95 to 80 won't make much of a difference anyways.... especially if you go with a heat pump.

As for reliability of a heat pump, I had the same concerns that you have about the mechanical on/off cycling of the unit all the time if it's my primary heat source. Since you said you are going to be in the home only 5-10 more years, this issue is irrevelant because you have a 10 year warranty on the heat pump. But even if you don't take that into account, the best reasoning given to me about longevity of these things is to consider a refrigerator. It cycles on and off many times every day the same way a heat pump does. And how long do they last?? The key is to just keep the thing clean and well cared-for (assuming the installers did a good job).

I myself got a two-stage Bryant Heat Pump with their 315 two-stage variable speed 80% evolution furnace and I got the Evolution thermostat. This is the best combination in my opinion because you get the flexibility of using heat pump or furnace to heat (duel fuel option) and you get a/c. You can switch to whichever you want based on energy prices and it provides excellent humidity control. The Evolution t-stat will also manage your humidifier if you get one.

You've done part of the math and you're asking yourself the right questions. Now it's time to do the rest of the math. As you said, it's not easy to estimate the cost savings of a hybrid system. But you CAN estimate the cost savings of a non-hybrid system consisting of the similar equipment.

So consider a 16-SEER AC paired with a 95% AFUE furnace. Given your energy usage and your existing equipment, your annual heating costs would be about $188 and your annual cooling costs would be about $126. So your annual costs would drop from $523 to $314, assuming energy prices remain unchanged.

Now, consider a low-end 13-SEER AC paired with an 80% AFUE furnace. You haven't mentioned any quotes for this sort of system but we'll assume an 80% AFUE furnace goes for about $1500 less than the 95% Infinity model you where quoted and a 13-SEER AC will probably go for about $2k less than the 16-SEER HP you were quoted. So let's say the 13SEER AC+80% AFUE furnace setup is $3500 cheaper. But you don't get the tax credit so it's really only $2000 cheaper. (You didn't mention any other rebates associated with the quoted system so I'll assume there are none.)

Using similar estimates, your annual costs for a 13/80% system would be $233 and $155, respectively for a total of $378/year.

So the question, then, how long will it take for the 16/95% system to save $2000 versus the 13/80% system? According to these guesstimates, the 16/95% system will save you about $65/year versus a 13/80% system. So it'd take over 30 years before the 16/95% system would save enough to justify purchasing it instead of the 13/80% system even taking the $1500 tax credit into account.

We can assume that a comparison between 16/95% and 13/80% hybrid systems will yield similar cost-recovery ratios.

Since equipment lifespan will probably be in the 15-18 year range, your energy rates would have to either be double from the git-go or steadily increase until they're triple or quadruple (say a steady increase of 8-10% per year for 15 years) before the 16/95% system begins to make financial sense versus the 13/80% system.

This doesn't answer the question about whether you should choose hybrid HP+furnace or a traditional AC+furnace but I hope it sheds some light on whether it makes financial sense to choose at 16-SEER/95% AFUE system or a 13-SEER/80% AFUE system.

i pretty much said with our already low energy costs i wasn't concerned with payback, didn't think it would happen.

my post at 14:10 was: "for the extra we hope to get: the top tier energy cost efficiency (not too important as out energy costs are already low) control of humidity year round at the thermostat, and the ability to dial in a heat pump if gas costs rise compared to electric. also, making as small a environmental impact as possible for the next 20-30 years."
(although my first post does mention heat pump savings questions)
i also did mention there (14:10) the $1200 carrier rebate that helps us consider the high end system. the rebate makes the cost difference closer. just reread the 14:10 post.

i didn't consider that the two stage furnace might be a breakdown issue,just thought about the burner vs compressor thing. you are correct. however, with the high end system (made more affordable with tax credits and rebates) it is attractive because of slightly lower bills, easy precise humidity control, and more environmentally friendly for not only us, but the users for the life of the system.

these all tilt me toward the high end, especially if i can choose not to run it as a pump until it costs less (and conserve compressor run time) and if a heat pump is essentially the same as a ac unit with different electronics. the extra $1400 up front isn't a problem and the above benefits seem to make it worth it for us.

i'm getting dizzy...but i got little else to do till i'm in a walking cast.

ps. for my wife's sinus benefit and my ease i like humidity control at the thermostat available only with the high end furnace and the med high heat pump/or ac unit. she uses a stand alone humidifier now in winter and needs maximum sinus support with a dog in the house as well. this is worth quite a bit to us both.

So from your messages, it doesn't sound like cost is much of an issue. Get a Carrier Infinity or Bryant Evolution system (same thing)... 80% AFUE Infinity variable speed furnace with an Infinity Heat Pump with Infinity stat. That will give you the best of all worlds.

With this setup, you have 2 heat sources that you can choose from any time you want. I guess if you really want to go all out, you can get the 95% furnace, but that just adds complexity without getting you much in savings return.

yes, that model will give us everything as well. do you have any idea how much less the unit costs? what happens is the rebate declines with the less pricey models and they offset each other. turns out to be a wash sometimes. plus for the environmental angle, i sure like using 95% of something. kinda like leaving too much peanut butter in the bottom of the jar. however, if the differential is $1000 i might consider it. at least i'd like to know.

the salesman just emailed to say with rebates factored in there's only $100 difference between the 16 seer ac and the 16 seer pump. wish i could feel more confident with him.

Dabbindan - I was pretty much in the same boat as you are and went with the Infinity system. We did dual fuel on the 1st floor and straight HP on the 2nd in NC. The furnace is 90% (it is in the basement so the piping is easier for 90% otherwise I would have done 80%). Our energy cost is closer to $1200 a year but reference house (based on energy audit) was more than double that - our rates are just about double yours.

The stat is great, the variable speed is great, the 2 stage is great etc etc. We have a milder climate than you but the house has never been below 30% humidity and rarely above 45% - and that is mostly when we leave windows open in the spring and fall.

i noted the post from junkmailhold and looked at the bryant angle. this estimator unlike carrier was willing to communicate with me and will come out monday. he thinks with a less high end furnace (still 90% or more) he can give us all on the carrier estimate (16 seer hp,evo therm,humidifier, good filter, cond pump) and have a good shot a beating the price. they are another local long term business so i'm fairly confident with the install. we shall see. even so. i'm good with carrier. just like to get all the peanut butter i can out of the jar.

Peace. I guess it took more than 20 minutes for me to write that response so I didn't see your 14:10 post prior to posting.

dabbindan,

Yes, I got a Bryant system and they are indeed 100% the same as the Carrier ones. Only the brand sticker is different. So get a quote on the same models from each side and pick the cheapest.

As for the heat pump vs a/c... heck, if you are that unsure about the heat pump reliability with it turning on and off all the time, just use it as an a/c only. But still buy the Heat Pump. If you only use it in a/c mode, then it is using the same mechanical components as a normal a/c. The reversing valves just won't activate to heat mode.

With regard to the 90 furnace though, I'd be more concerned over getting an above 80 high efficienecy furnace's reliability than the heat pump. Make sure you ask about and read up on their known quirks and issues too. Just cause it's just a burning flame doesn't mean it doesn't have LOTS of complex circuits and parts that can fail as well. I know the 80 AFUE furnaces are simpler and more reliable than the 90+ ones. That difference might be small, but it's no smaller than worrying about a heat pump's reliability.

Hope that gives you some more to think about...

Here is my .02. Go Hybrid and do not look back. The fuel prices WILL fluctuate sooner or later it will happen. With a dual fuel system and good T-stat there are a lot of setup options. If the gas prices are really low you can set the heat pump lockout at 40 or so degrees or lock it out completely so it will not run. If gas prices jump like they have in the past you can do just the opposite and lock the gas heat out until it gets down to 30 degrees or so and then only run to supplement the heat pump when needed.

A good hybrid system and good thermostat will set you up with the ability to make the best of whatever rates you have for the life of the system for a nominal added price.

my thanks for all the response and attention. for those still interested, i'll report on the bryant man and the final decision. i'd like to see the final cost nearer to $6000.

this is the most responsive forum i have been on. helped me refine and focus my thinking. cool. and not just in a heat pump kinda way.

what countrybomo said,
with an 80& gas furnace 20% efficiency is lost.
with 90+ 10% or less loss.
comfort is a factor, which is hard to put a price
on..

"A good hybrid system and good thermostat will set you up with the ability to make the best of whatever rates you have for the life of the system for a nominal added price"

make sure that the installer has experience with higher
efficiency gas installs. it isn't rocket science, but you
don't want to be anyone's test run.

also make sure that ductwork is mastic sealed, return air is sealed and if you have recessed lights..we can tell you
how to seal them also. Hopefully IF you do have can lights
they are Insulation Contact Air Tight (ICAT) and
not IC only.

best of luck.

dabbibdan

I want to go back to your Carrier quote.

Here are the numbers.

3495574 Active Systems PERFORMANCE 16 PURON HP CARRIER AIR CONDITIONING 25HPA636A30 CNPV*3617A**+UI 58MV(B,C)060-14 33800 12.10 15.00 37000 9.00

On Seer and EER, this evap coil is not the best choice.

I would want the 3717 mdl. take a look. it makes a difference.

3495587 Active Systems PERFORMANCE 16 PURON HP CARRIER AIR CONDITIONING 25HPA636A30 CNPV*3717A**+UI 58MV(B,C)060-14 35200 12.60 16.00 37600 9.10 22600

same equipment is available from Bryant dealer.

still alot of firepower on heating side. ask dealer how those five stgs of heating operate.

IMO

Amazing. The answer seemingly hasn't changed in nine years since the question was asked and answered at least a thousand times! lol

Even if Franco Oyuela plagiarized the answer and took the words as his own!