I am building now and have a horizontal system as you describe. I'm in Connecticut, the health district told me I had to have minimum 25' separation between well and field. I laid the loop myself and it is very durable. I'm not worried about leakage, it's buried about 6' deep. All that said, I haven't fired the system up yet, hopefully in about a month after the floors and interior trim work is done. :-)

We were going to do Geothermal. Builder was to use pump/dump system. 2 wells. One pulls water out (with heat) and the other dumps it back into the ground water table. Can be done on small footprint of land.

Unless you DIY all of the drilling and excavate for all of the lines, it's really hard to get a timely payback on the LARGE up front expense of geothermal. Better insulated exterior sheathing or a staggered double 2x4 wall construction costs less and has a much better payback as far as energy efficiency goes.

Our estimate for the geothermal system was $35,000 (ouch!) for a 2200 square foot house, two zones (single story with walkout) and about $900 a year to operate. Right now we pay about $1400 a year to head and cool our home with a traditional forced air system in a poorly insulated 1960's two story home. We do keep thermostat around 62 in the winter and 77 in the summer (we'd probably like to keep it a little cooler than that in the new home). The house is already framed (2x6 exterior walls). No insulation yet - planning to do blown in cellulose. What else can I do at this point to make the house more energy efficient?

Payback with tax credits was quoted as 5 years. YMMV

Thank you Springtime Builders! You are one of my favorite pros on this site - always so kind and generous with your advice. Now, if I could just figure out how to make the move to NC so that you could build my house! ;) In the meantime, I will focus on your recommendations for our current house.

I have a geothermal system (closed loop, wells). The major cost was drilling my wells. I don't think the end of the tax credit is going to change the cost to drill them. NC used to require 5 year relicensing of these wells, but they were found sufficiently safe that they abandoned that. Mine are probably 150' from the water well, but I don't think it matters. They are both in the aquifer. Leaking toxic chemicals is going to be a bad scene.

Payback with tax credits was quoted as 5 years. -

That seems really optimistic. I would have to see numbers to be sure but I suspect they oversold the system a bit.

We definitely wouldn't get it back in 5 years. An energy effect traditional forced air system with an airtight, well insulated house will probably cost us $1000 tops to operate.

I have natural gas available and I will be going with that. Many of my neighbors have gone with ground source heat pumps...In my area they never really pay back but I have seen math that suggested they do in some areas.

I wanted to do geothermal in the worst way - it just "sounds" green. But I too have natural gas, and running the numbers showed me geothermal was a financial loss even factoring in the tax credits. It wasn't even close. My house is indeed energy star certified and has a great HERS score. Energy efficiency and being respectful of our planet matters a lot to me - but not so much that I wanted to sink something like $30k into a losing proposition.

patriceny - what did you end up going with for your heating and cooling? A traditional forced air system? If so, which furnace and air conditioner did you choose?

Do you have natural gas available Dreamhouse?

One of my favorite benefits of geothermal is the lack of noise because there are no outdoor units.

I didn't do gas because I wanted to use one system for both heating and cooling.

That being said - I don't find it to be "all that" and I am struggling to justify it for the new house that will be LEED Platinum. I've not seen the savings AT ALL - and while I had efficient air source heat pumps prior - I am not feeling the cost savings geothermal love. It should last a lot longer than air source, and the NC tax credits made it not that big a stretch from high efficiency air source - so I am glad I hadn't banked on huge electric bill reductions.

Now to determine what else to use... We could probably do mini-splits, but... we did not pre-plan the holes we need for them, I want the industrial look of exposed ductwork, and lastly, I think mini-splits look like stuck on appliance warts in the house.

We do have natural gas available and are already installing it for the cooktop, dryer, grill, and backup generator.

Thank you for sharing your experience jannicone. And I agree with you, I hate the look of mini splits!

you sound like me, @Dreamhouse26... - we'll have propane for the generator, as well as likely the outdoor grill.

We installed closed loop geo when we built 3 years ago and the Federal Tax Credit helped and our electric co-op paid us $3,500.00 for going geo. We are very happy with ours and as mentioned above we really like not having an outside unit running to disturb our peace and quiet on our 30 acres.

With natural gas available I just don't see how you can get geothermal to payback from a strictly financial perspective, and there is no way you are getting it to payback in 5 years. If you want to throw some numbers up I can work the math for you but I have never seen an area that has natural gas available that paid back in even 10 years.

@ jannicone - In the Middle East we had mini-splits and I absolutely love them.

We used the LG art cools and they were not too obtrusive.

There is also the in ceiling ones which are really not too bad.

Thanks, bry911. In my modern loft space - not sure that will work - and with our metal / insulated roofing system, we're working hard to not pierce the roof. trying to get a simplified floorpan to share here and already have some renderings - but aesthetically - and likely functionally - that won't work.

For new construction - part of the payback CAN be that fact that you have to have 2 separate systems with electric AC and natural gas heat.

We made the calculations when we built our current house based on climate / degree days and cost of electricity vs gas and high efficiency air source heat pumps were the way to go.

Geothermal wasn't really a payback decision for us - but the state tax credits we had made it competitive, and then adding the expected life of the units (with no outdoor units) it's not too bad. No noise was nice for us too.

I guess I don't see the separate systems as a downside, I guess, I don't really even see them as separate systems. You have the same number of components in both. In a heat pump you have an air handler, an indoor coil, an outdoor coil and a compressor. With gas, you have a furnace with an air handler, an indoor coil, an outdoor coil and compressor. Physically the two are nearly identical in size and complexity. Installation is about equal on both, heat pumps are a bit harder to install but don't require gas line, so that levels out. Cost wise they are pretty close, within $1,000 bucks of each other. But in cold climates gas is just nicer.

To me two different systems would be a hydronic radiant and an AC. Not simply another component on an existing system.

I don't see the connection with payback. I am not saying that it is not there, I just don't see it.

2 things

with gas heat and electric AC - it's 2 separate components since a heat pump just "runs backwards" for heating, and therefore additional costs in equipment when you have to add the gas heater.

and "in cold climates gas is just nicer" makes no sense. heat is heat. Past heat pumps have had bad reputations because of being incorrectly sized and installers doing poor jobs resulting in inefficiency and/or large swings / cold spots, etc. A properly sized heat pump and viable speed air handler, in an area that climatically "fits" a heat pump, will provide a stable comfortable environment at higher efficiency than a gas heat / electric AC combination.

YYMV based on your climate - but in my area of NC - the heat pump is the most efficient way to climate control your home.

Gas adds the space and venting concerns of a furnace. Extra costs can include the gas appliance components, infrastructure from the street, drop line cost from piping contractor, venting parts and a monthly service fee from another utility provider despite the amount used. There are added concerns of combustion inside the living space and the environmental and societal concerns of fossil fuel extraction.

GSHP are amazing but not cost effective yet in most areas. The environmtal impacts are very real, and not to be taken lightly. But it takes a bit over 10,300 btu of fossil fuel heat to get 1 kw of electricity and since a heat pump produces about 3 watts of heat per watt of electricity used and a watt is 3.41 btus we get over 10,230 btu per kwh...natural gas and a 94% efficiency furnace gives you about just slightly less at 9,680 btus burned in the furnace, a 97% efficiency furnace gets you near the same point. Even considering only 75% of power is fossil fuel generated, the environmental impact between options is negligible unless we are saying that nuclear power is the green power of the future.

The OP already has gas, so there is no additional costs of running gas lines. Since we are talking payback period the costs of running vent, gas and everything else is moot. We are using the marginal cost of GSHP to begin with. The total cost to install a GSHP system over the total cost to install a high efficiency gas furnace system, divided by the actual annual savings is not going to payback in 5 years for the average homeowner in the Midwest, in fact, I will be impressed to see a 10 year payback.

The reason I said gas is better in colder areas is the air out of a gas furnace will typically be 20 to 30 degrees warmer and therefore be more responsive. GSHPs will typically throw air at 100 to 105 degrees near the unit, furnaces will be 120 to 130. This amounts to significantly less time for a room to reach temperature.

in order to "reach" temperature, the room had to depart from temperature. the most efficient way to heat / cool is to keep a subtle constant temp with slow air circulation.

and thanks Springtime Builders for also articulating combustion in the living space and indoor air quality concerns in today's tight building envelopes.

in order to "reach" temperature, the room had to depart from temperature. the most efficient way to heat / cool is to keep a subtle constant temp with slow air circulation.

Prove that. Don't stub your toe on the laws of thermodynamics while you are at it.

Let me clarify above opinions because I am suddenly the guy who likes forced air gas instead of GSHP...which is really not true. There are many reasons to use a different heat source than forced air gas. All of those reasons are great and true and good and yah!

To pretend that gas doesn't have any advantages is simply being disingenuous, as would pretending that GSHP's don't have any advantages. They both have some advantages and some disadvantages, but there are also some myths about both of them.

Real geothermal has some amazing environmental benefits, but many of the GSHP environmental benefits are oversold. As these systems age and start dropping antifreeze into the groundwater table I can't see the marginal fossil fuel benefit being enough to make them environmentally friendly. This isn't to say they are bad, or that you are bad for doing them, had the finances worked out I would have done one.

However, payback period refers to the period of time required to recoup the funds expended in an investment, or to reach the break-even point. Payback is purely financial, whether you install one system, two separate systems or two hundred separate systems really has nothing to do with payback at all.

The savings that are quoted for GSHPs simply rarely come to fruition, and rely on customers having a lack of understanding. We were quoted a minimum of $18,000 more for GSHP after the tax rebates (assuming the drilling had no unexpected problems). When the guy started talking payback period he conveniently left off the additional interest charges for the mortgaged amount.

Payback period also ignores the time value of money. At some point, you have to get away from payback period altogether..I use 9 years. Anything not paid back in 9 years essentially never pays back.

The fact that it will never get close to paying for itself is the real reason I am saying no. Others may have the exact same numbers and decide the benefits are worth paying for. I would pick it over gas if it were competitively priced.

GSHP doesn't work for you. Your gas pricing might make more sense, as does your climate. Tax rebates vary by state. Electric rates vary by utility. It's not one size fits all.

I already said that I don't see the real payback / financial benefits - but the soft benefits are appreciated by me.

My GSHP closed loop contains water only.

Both systems / types, properly installed, can provide a pleasant and efficient heating experience and your satisfaction may be influenced by any number of factors.

There's no perfect answer, and there's a lot of personal preference involved - but if it makes you feel better - you are right on all counts.

Bogus and deceptive "myths" busters.

Love how author busting non existing myth with blatantly deceptive claims... "wear out " .... the expense is much less than putting in an entire new geothermal system.

The myth post is just click bait.

I hate our geothermal system. It has been nothing but $$$$ since installation. It makes our electric bill $100 more than our neighbor's bill during the extreme months where the AC or heaters are running most. We paid extra hoping to save money, instead it costs us extra. Our two houses are the same heated and cooled square footage, and our bills are about the same in the mild months, so I know that it is our geothermal system causing the huge discrepancies in the more extreme months. My geothermal system makes me ragey.