That massive spike of 50c/kWh at the left looks tiny compared to today even though that’s already insanely expensive
Tomorrow is back to normal. Even the 37c/kWh spike hardly registers on the graph compared to today even though that’s still pretty expensive.
Are you actually paying the daily spot price? Not a flat amount with the utility provider taking the hit? That’s how I know it from any other country, unless you have a specific contract where the user made an informed decision to opt for market rates.
Mainly the reason is that many countries do not have hourly capable meters, so calculating the price for each hour is not possible. Flat rate is needed when you just have the cumulative read once a month.
In Finland the meters communicate automatically once a day, and send the 24h values to grid company. The next generation meters which are now installed can communicate once a hour.
30% of Finns are on spot.
Oh interesting, never knew that’s a thing. Sounds mostly like a good development to make people more conscious about their consumption.
Sounds more like an incentive to put up solar panels and battery storage. Even if it isn’t enough to go off grid totally, you can at least store on cheap days.
Spot is quite normal in the Nordics. Over all it’s the cheapest, but some days suck obviously.
This summer we had days with negative prices. My bill for July was 78 NOK (about $8). Might have been August when I think about it…
Yeah about 30% of Finns have a plan lile that. It’s bit of an gamble, but on average it’ll be cheaper on the long run.
40c/kWh is a pretty normal price here in Germany…
Ironically, prices are high, because of too much extremely cheap renewables.
Bullshit. Check the prices around Christmas last year, Germany was running only on renewables on the 24th and I paid .19€/kWh all day long then.
Do you really think, that’s what anyone pays? Because that’s not how consumer contracts work. You’re paying whatever you agreed upon when signing the contract.
Source: https://www.stromauskunft.de/strompreise/
This was literally 10s of google. Is that so hard?
Yes, that’s what I pay. That’s what my contract works like.
And on average, you’ll pay just as much as everyone else. If prices go through the roof, you’ll get screwed. See 2022.
Nope. More than 80% of my usage comes from heating and driving and I’ve heavily optimized car charging and heat buffering to make use of low cost times.
Heating can only be optimized for about 24h periods, that’s why I can supplement my heating with wood from my own forest.
Driving, between April and October pretty much only happens using electricity from my own roof, between May and September the entire house uses less than 100kWh from the grid.
Before I signed at Tibber, I had of course compared my recorded load profiles including simulations for automated usage optimization against EPEX 60min day-ahead prices and I would have been at less than 0.23€/kWh on average since 2020, including the high prices of 2022.
Hang a few blankets or bubble foil against the windows for
isolationinsulation.What about for insulation?
No no, it’s for insolention. Fuck them HOAs.
wow that is crazy. my bill for December was $77 in the US.
Wouldn’t there be a price cap in events that the wholesale market has anomalies like this? That’s standard in most jurisdictions. The wholesale price is still “real” because there’s some system or market condition reflected in this spike, it’s just not normal for ratepayers at the distribution level to not have a price cap protection. It’s like the opposite scenario if the price isn’t high enough to cover the cost in actually delivering the energy and running the grid, so a Global Adjustment would come in to effect to cover the difference. There can even be surplus conditions where the price is in the negative.
what kind of regulatory distopia do these laws come from?
/s
We have price caps in the UK. They’re not perfect but they have stopped us from paying a lot more than we would have this past year. And the UK is definitely no (did you mean to say?) utopia. Or do you think a price cap to protect consumers is something from a distopia?
Big part of the price was that Finland was close to needing rolling blackouts, because there wasn’t enough electricity. All transmit lines were fully utilized, and all available power plants on, so only way to get the consumption down was with the price.
It worked, Finland dropped the electricity consumption almost 10% and we got through quite easily.
I guess with my knowledge of energy markets, a situation like that would result in higher prices just by the way the market functions, responding to supply and demand. The graph here appears to be a market clearing price rather than a price after adjustments, where a lot of incentives would be brought in like an intentional price hike.
We were in the opposite situation though where we were running into surplus overnight during a period of energy transition. You’d see these stupid misinformed articles being like, “the government is giving away YOUR electricity to the US!” Was like during the 2003 blackout where we needed to bring large loads online carefully alongside generation, people were freaking out how casinos and industry got power before them. The need for dispatchable loads connected to the high voltage transmission grid in that situation wasn’t as headline worthy.
How are you using 21kWh/day heating a small home? Do you have any insulation at all?
Probably because it’s about -35C outside.
Dude is basically living on the set of The Thing at this point.
That’s a perfectly normal number for any home that isn’t very new and perfectly insulated.
My 37sqm appartment needs approximately 5000 kWh in natural gas per year, 876 kWh last December, so 28 kWh per day on average. The building is admittedly old and not perfectly insulated but it’s also not a log cabin out in the open in Finland, but instead a flat enclosed within 3 other flats in the middle of cosy, never below -8C Germany.
21 kWh in a log cabin in Finnland actually seemed pretty low to me. It’s sort of obvious OP is using a heat pump and the cabin must really be absolutely tiny.
Why are you measuring natural gas in kWh? How do you even measure that as such?
It’s an easy conversion - 1 kWh is equal to 3412 Btus. In Germany, both electricity and natural gas are charged in kWh. I know a fair bit about energy measurement if you have any questions.
This is fascinating to me. How does it factor efficiency, since gas needs to be burned?
How does it factor efficiency, since gas needs to be burned?
Energy is energy regardless of what unit is used to show it. so 3412 BTUs always equals 1kWh.
You do an efficiency calculation after, average gas blower is about 90% so you’d end up with 3070 BTUs or 0.9kWh of heat energy.
Great question. When it comes to utility billing, efficiency doesn’t factor at all. Just like with electric billing, the utility company gives zero shits about what you do with your energy. They just bill you for everything you use.
Utility companies keep track of the volume used in cubic meters and convert it to kWh using the formula…
Volume (in cubic meters) • Calorific value (usually around 37-42) • 1.02264 (correction factor) ÷ 3.6 (conversion factor to kWh) = kWh
The calorific value accounts for the varying energy density of natural gas caused by its inconsistent composition. The correction factor accounts for the effects of the average temperature and pressure at the property on gas volume measurement. 1.02264 is standard for most locations but would be different if the location is extreme, like the high elevation of Machu Picchu.
What sucks about gas heating is some of the heat energy released leaves with the exhaust. The heating efficiency varies depending on the unit but is generally 90-95% for newer units but as low as 50% for older units. While 90-95% doesn’t seem bad, electric heat pumps achieve efficiencies that exceed 100%, even as high as 300+%.
To turn gas to electricity assume 50% efficiency. 2MWh of gas = 1MWh of electricity.
So given that most gas furnaces (at least in the US) operate at 90-95% efficiency, does that mean 20 kWh of resistive electric heat (as measured on the bill) provides similar heat to ~11 kWh of gas?
It would equal about 22kWh of gas, since gas isn’t 100% efficient like electric heat is.
Ah. 50% efficency to turn gas into electricity.
If you are just making heat then burning gas directly is much better.
It does not factor efficiency at all.
The bill does not care about efficiency.
Very common in countries that use the metric system (ie literally everywhere except the USA). It’s measured either in kWh or in m^3
Cubic meters (or another similar measure of volume) is what I’d expect. It’s the conversion to an unrelated and theoretical (since it’s not actually being converted to electricity) unit that confuses me. I presume it’s to make it easier to compare electric vs gas heat, but the variable efficiency of burning gas and the existence of heat pumps ruin that.
kWh is a unit of energy. Regardless of whether it is in the form of electricity or from burning fuel. So it is actually very related, and much more useful than a measurement of volume I’d argue. The measurement is of course done in m³, but then a conversion factor based on several factors is used to convert to an actually useful unit.
A m³ of gas really could be anything depending on pressure, temperature and constituents.
Yeah, even firewood can be (and not uncommonly is) measured in kWh
(Brace yourself for Much 'Merica) Several gas utilities I’ve had in the USA measure natural gas CCF, which is 100 cubic feet (at some standard temperature/pressure), which happens to be almost exactly the same as a Therm, or 100,000 BTU.
My meter measures it in m3 and my supplier, knowing the exact caloric value of the product they’re selling, tells me in kWh on my bill.
edit: m3 of course not 2 lol
deleted by creator
50kWh and closer to 90kWh on days like this. It’s a log cabin and I’m keeping my root cellar and insulated shed above freezing aswell. Even running a 1kW heater all day would result in a consumption more than 21kWh and that wouldn’t keep any house warm.
A tiny heater running all day would do that.
1kw is a small heater. 0.8kw is a tiny one. 0.8x24 is 19.2. Assuming they have other basic appliances, that’s already more than enough to account for their usage.
I’ve got a small 1200w heater that kicks on in the morning to bring the living room space up to 69. I live in a 40 year old house that’s insulated fairly well (I just had the attic redone last year to r-49) and it’s 45f outside right now. That little heater has used 6kWh since kicking on this morning getting the house up from 63f to the near 69 it is now.
On a day below freezing that heater will got for a lot longer through the day to keep temps up.
Space heaters are the way to go.
It’s the difference between paying $70 and $5 more per month.
Space heaters are one of the most expensive methods. Check the power consumption, they are hungry things.
My electric bill says otherwise.
As always, I encourage people to see for themselves rather than trusting strangers on the internet.
The only time space heaters work well is when you avoid heating the whole house, and instead heat only a room
No shit.
You don’t exactly understand heat pumps, do you?
A space heater has an efficiency of close to 100%, heat pumps have at worst 100% and at best somewhere between 300 and 500%. Granted, in -35C environments, it’s probably very close to 100%, but that’s the absolute worst case, and an anomaly even in Finland.
What are you smoking? Space heaters gulp down electricity with the smallest ones running at hundreds of watts and standard ones around 1-2 kilowatts. The only ways a space heater is more efficient is if either you’re spending a shitton of energy heating rooms you aren’t in or if your homes heating system is in bad need of repair/replacement
Well, my electric bill went up a negligible amount and I keep the space heater running pretty much all the time.
Maybe you bought a shitty one or you’re getting a shitty deal for your electricity.
All space heaters operate at the same efficiency since they convert electricity to heat via resistance. You may have a small one and low electricity rates in your area to see a negligible change. Or maybe other uses went down and masked the increase from the space heater usage.
Almost. Some are better at heating people, others are better at heating air
Bruh I don’t think you understand how electricity consumption works.
A space heater will pull a given wattage, say 1000 watts for a pretty common one. Electric heaters are 100% efficient meaning 100% of the energy going in is converted to heat, so running that 1000 watt space heater for 1 hour will consume 1000 watt-hours (or 1 kilowatt hour) and heat the space by exactly 1000 watts or 1 kilowatt (kilo meaning thousand)
Plugging this into a electric bill calculator, at a common $0.15/kWh running that 1000 watt space heater 24/7 will cost about $100 per month
If your space heater is so insanely awesome, please do tell me, what’s your electric rate and the wattage of the heater?
Bruh, I don’t think you understand that heating a room is cheaper than heating your whole house. If I ran my space heater 24/7, I’d be sweating all day. If I run my central heater 24/7, my house barely reaches the temperature my room does before I turn my space heater off.
My electric bill is ~$160 when running the central heater. It’s ~$80 when I run my space heater.
As always, I encourage people to see for themselves rather than trusting strangers on the internet.
Experience is better than theory, every time. I feel sorry for the people who will avoid saving money because of comments like yours.
To quote my earlier comment with emphasis this time:
The only ways a space heater is more efficient is if either you’re spending a shitton of energy heating rooms you aren’t in or if your homes heating system is in bad need of repair/replacement
So you’ve already agreed with my original point, because you reduced power consumption by turning your HVAC down and using a space heater to heat just the room you’re in. Running a 4 kilowatt central heater will use more electricity as it runs than a 1 kilowatt space heater. But a 1 kilowatt space heater is still pulling down a kilowatt to run (which is a lot!)
Experience is better than theory, every time. I feel sorry for the people who will avoid saving money because of comments like yours.
YOU CAN LITERALLY CALCULATE THIS! Watts consumed by the heating source multiplied by number of hours per month it runs gives you the watt hours for power consumption, bigger number means bigger bill. In fact it’s important to calculate it first because electric bills will naturally fluctuate and be difficult to identify the changes in consumption due to being an aggregate of everything in your home combined with outside temperature fluctuations.
I like to keep my bedroom a cosy 1600 degrees C
Outer walls in new homes in the Nordic countries are often 25-30 inches thick filled with insulation. They will keep out some cold (and some heat).
Heat pumps aren’t designed to function in this low of temperature. The problem is they need a real heater instead of a heat exchanger.
This is such an outdated information. Modern heatpumps work just fine even in temperatures of -20C and below. Ofcourse the efficiency gets worse the colder it is but even at worst it’s still 100% efficient. On a typical year there’s only a handful of really cold days. It doesn’t make sense not to get a heatpump just because it’s inefficient for few days. It’s not like it stops heating or something. It just effectively turns into electric radiator which is what my house was heated with before I got the heatpump anyways.
This is true only if you have a heat pump with electric/resistive backup heat. But for some reason, it’s pretty easy to buy one in the US that doesn’t. (Which is where I assume that poster is, because most anti-heat-pump sentiment seems to come from here.)
Not quite, in my experience on really cold days my heat pump struggles to keep up. This is expecially true when the outside unit is frosting up. The unit has to reverse and pump heat out of the house.
That’s one of the reasons i run my wood pellet stove on those days. The secondary source of heat takes the load off the heat pump.
Sure, but as I said it’s just a handfull of days in a year. If the heatpump alone struggles to keep my house warm I can just switch on one or two electric radiators.
In an area that gets very cold, a geothermal heat pump (which uses the ground rather than the air for heat exchange) would work better than an air-source heat pump. More expensive to install though, and you need a good amount of land
It’s basically what modern homes should have built below them. Then it doesn’t need extra space. Wonder if it’s already enough to put some pipes a meter below the basement?
Most heat pumps will use the aux coils to defrost. It’s also ok for the heat pump to literally run 24/7 if it needs to. A lot of people freak out when the heat pump runs all day and blows “cool” 80F at from the vents, but it’s still working as intended. Though I totally get how that can make a place feel “drafty” without some backup running
It’s true they’re at worst 100% efficient, but they’re also typically sized lower than resistive electric heaters in terms of input power. In the US, a residential heat pump likely draws about 4kW, whereas resistive heat strips or baseboard heating could be multiples of that. As an air source heat pump’s output drops on very cold days, a unit rated for e.g. 48000BTU/hr at 47°f might produce only half of that at 5°f/-15c. A “good” unit here would produce perhaps 75%. The way we do HVAC sizing, unless you radically oversized the system for most weather (including air conditioning) you’ll need a backup source of heat on the coldest days.
Code (law specifying how much heating / cooling capacity is required in normal worst-case weather conditions) where I live would require me to use about 2x the normal sizing to achieve pure heat pump heating at the required design temperature (around 5f/-15c). That means at the peak of summer (about 100f/38c) the unit would be operating at less than half of its full cooling capacity.
Apologies for weird units; I live in MAGAland.
I live in a very cold part of the world where the temps can easily exceed your -20C for night times for several weeks at a time. And even as the daily high for a week stretch or two over a winter. And while I could have purchased a heat pump that would work to that low of a temperature, it would have cost over twice the price. Going from $5000US installed to over $10,000US for just the heat pump. And that included the rebate incentives.
My heat pump is set to set to cut out and switch to LP heat at -10C because it becomes cheaper to run an LP furnace at that point - cost of electricity = 6.5 cents per kilowatt hour vs $1.75US gallon LP. The loss of efficiency matters to my pocket book. And I chose my particular heat pump with my advice of my Daughter who has a PhD in ME and works as a research engineer for a non-profit studying HVAC systems and the efficiencies of the technology used in them. And she won’t install a heat pump in her house because for where she lives, they literally do not make financial sense. There is zero savings to be had with switching from natural gas heat to electric.
So installing a heat pump is not a universal no brainer. You still need to to the math to see if it pays.
Yeah obviously it’s a whole different game when you live in a place like that. That’s just quite rare usecase. The vast majority of people who keep repeating the “heatpumps don’t work in cold climates” lives in a climate much warmer than I do. Even mine struggles on the really cold days we get few times a year but that’s fine because it gets the job done flawlessly for the remaining 350 days.
My issue with these arguments is the blanket statements that get made. Both arguments on this particular subject can both be true at the same time. And until you do the math for your specific situation, you can’t tell if it pays until you know the answer
Now, I believe it works out for you just as it does for me. But I had to the math to figure it out to know for sure. Most people who argue over this subject have never done the math.
If your intention is to heat or cool air using as little electricity as possible, a basic heat pump split air conditioning unit is going to be more than adequate for 90% of people. If you live in a place like Yakutsk, then yeah, you probably need to look into something else, but for the vast majority of people it’s going to be just fine. A general recommendation doesn’t mean it’s the best choice for literally every single person.
But it very often catches many who simply take it as an irrefutable truth.
As I gave as an example, my one Daughter who is recognized by her peers as an expert in this field, and is all about improved efficiency and renewable energy, did the math and found that it doesn’t work for her. And it’s not because she lives in a terrible climate - it’s warmer and varies less than where I live by a noticeable amount. It’s because when you compare total costs, over the life span of a heat pump, she would end up paying extra to have one verses a simple natural gas furnace. It would be even sillier for my neighbor who is a logger. He uses 100% wood heat. Because he can literally harvest, process, and store enough firewood for several years in one afternoon. Anything else is far more expensive. But the math says it works for me.
You can’t make general statements about 90% of all people until everyone does the math. This is just one of the field studies my Daughter is doing. Trying to collect enough real time data on real homes and families and doing the math to help pinpoint locations where it makes sense and where it does not make sense at this time. It does not always workout like you and I might think it would.
In very cold climates, having a hybrid system like the one you’re describing is that universal no brainer in my opinion. Especially since most cold regions also typically have really long transitional periods where your heat pump is most efficient and pays itself off fastest. Combining that with turning it off during harsh winter weeks gives you the best of both worlds.
It’s not even a no brainer even then. You absolutely need to actually do the math for your particular situation to make that determination. For me it works out. For my neighbor down the road who is a logger, it does not. He can harvest, process, and store 2 years worth of firewood in a mere handful of hours. Any other heat source makes little sense for him.
You really, really, really need to do the math!
I am also an engineer and used to have LP backup heat and the only way the LP is cheaper per BTU is if you rapidly deprecate the heat pump asset.
A gallon of propane has 91,000 BTU, and a kWh of electricity has 3400 BTU. 91k/3.4k ~ 26kWh x 0.065 ~ $1.73 for electricity equivalent at 1.0 coefficient of performance. But your COP is likely around 2-3, so the heat pump will be at least 2x cheaper than the LP. It would take like 6000 hours of operation to break even on the bigger heat pump, and that’s ignoring the cost and maintenance of the propane furnace
They work, but efficiency is near 1:1 when it’s that cold so there’s no cost advantage over a space heater.
It’s non-sensical to base the cost effectiveness of a heat pump on the handful of really cold days when it’s no more efficient than electric resistive heating. You have to take into account the entire heating season. Electric resistive heating is allways 100% efficient. Air sourced heat pump is 100% efficient in the worst possible conditions. In normal conditions it’s from 300% to 500% efficient. While your 650 watt space heater puts out heat at the constant rate of 650 watts, a heat pump outputs 3000 watts worth of heat while using that same 650 watts of energy.
There are heat pumps that exchange heat with the ground. Those can function well in more extreme temperatures. Also you could/should have alternative heating methods for extreme situations even if they are much more inneficient
In colder areas like that the heat pumps are usually ground source so the ambient air temperature doesn’t change the performance much.
Have you actually priced such systems and the payback time vs heat pumps vs petroleum sourced heat?
I know one person who chose a mix of ground heat pump, LP, and wood heat. He told me that it only had a reasonable payback was because he was building a new home and the extra cost could be tagged to the total build cost. Making it cheaper than a retro fit. He said it added another $25,000 to the cost of his new home. But in fairness, he does enjoy it.
I only do the refrigeration side of things and I don’t do residential stuff so I’m not sure on exact pricing. Pricing will also vary greatly depending on the exact area. For example in my area we have a high enough ground water level that open loop geothermal is easy and that is the cheapest/easiest method of geothermal. The other types will also vary in cost depending on soil type and moisture content because that will partially dictate how big of a ground loop you need. The amount of area you have for a ground loop will also be a big factor because if you don’t have enough yard area for a horizontal loop then you need to use a vertical loop which can be heniously expensive.
As far as payback goes they are far more expensive to install regardless of the type but the ground loop (assuming closed loop system) can easily last over 50 years and that is the most expensive part of the whole system by a large margin. Out of the $25,000 you mentioned I would bet that about $20,000 of that was just for the ground loop. The rest of the system is going to be more durable as well due to not being outdoors. The expected lifespan of the other components is 20 years and they can easily last far longer than that. So the energy savings is only part of the cost savings. The other part is that geothermal heat pumps need practically no maintenance and break down far more rarely than any other conventional heating or cooling solution. With how long they last and how durable they are a geothermal heat pump can probably pay itself off just with avoided service calls.
The biggest issue is if you don’t have the money to buy it, it matters very little about the efficiency and how long it lasts. You still need to pay for it. He could justify the expense because we are a very rural area and land is cheap and tagging it to a new build brings down the interest costs. This is often makes geo-thermal a non-starter for most - as you point out. He even admits he wouldn’t have done it under any other circumstance.
i keep a pile of coal in the cellar for the extra cold days
To do what with? Light a coal fire in the living room?
It doesn’t sound safe even in a proper fireplace.
found one whose never felt the heat of a coal stove
it’s handy to have backup heat source when the power goes out so pipes don’t freeze
Nope, I am far too young for that.
I have never heard of anyone that currently has a coal-heated house. I thought it was entirely dead in the developed world. Here these heating options are common district heating, geothermal, direct electric heating, some other kind of heat pump, biofuel (like pellets), and a tiny bit of oil and gas.
The most popular by far is district heating, after that comes electric heating (which includes electricity used for geothermal heat pumps and other kinds) and then biofuel. Gas and oil are barely visible on a graph.
I just tried to find a place in my country which sells coal for heating but alas I didn’t succeed. You can of course buy coal but its intended purpose is always grilling or smithing.
Your thinking of charcoal, which are chunks of wood converted into almost pure carbon by heating them above their combustion temperature in a low oxygen environment. He was talking about coal that was mined out of the ground. Plants from an ancient swamps that didn’t decompose, but were converted into almost pure carbon from millions of years of heat and pressure from being buried.
No.
I don’t think any type of coal heating has existed for homes in quite a long time in my country.
I honestly thought it was phased out decades ago in pretty much the entire western world.
I have electric! The coal stove is backup, some people use wood as a backup. It’s not uncommon
And then you just burn them in a pot on your table and breathe the exhaust?
Finland has more than 330 hydro power plants, with total capacity of over 3,100 megawatts in 2022. Hydro accounted for 18% of Finland’s total installed power generation capacity and 22% of total power generation in 2021.
WTFINLAND
Hydro-Québec Production main power plants (2020) Total Others (49 hydro, 1 therma) - 13302 MW
Hydro =/= hydro. The plants in Finland are tiny in comparison.
Finland is flat, no possiblity in hydro if you don’t have the mountains with water in them. Norway gets all the hydro, and Finland buys it there.
Canada has 85% of the worlds freshwater. There are a crazy amount of big rivers. Its not really a fait comparison.
This is Québec only. Other provinces that have more water and hills still have less hydro.
I don’t think the fact that Finland is north and cold and icy is a factor either. A lot of Québec’s power generating stations are in the desolate north, with some of the biggest ones on rivers flowing into the Hudson’s Bay, and they were built in the 70s.
However looking at the relief and hydro and topo maps of Finland, while there’s plenty of lakes, there’s no strong rivers. Couple this with an apparent ban on new hydro, and we got the answer.
I wonder how they’d fare with geothermal.
what the fuck?
If you’re in a granny cottage then just burn wood instead? Doing this rn and am very happy to go off-grid for ca. 48 hours
I unfortunelately don’t have a fireplace in my house. It was removed when the house was renovated in the 80’s
In a place where it’s regularly cold? Whose brilliant idea was that?!
When I said my house is tiny I truly mean that. I don’t even have space for a medium size house plant let alone a fireplace. The attic was converted into living space and I believe the fireplace used to be where the stairs are now.
I have a wood burning sauna on a separate building though
That sauna sounds like a candidate to hook up to the heat pump if you ask me.
Diesel heater set up properly maybe the way, just not sure how well it would work kept outdoors at those temperatures.
At 50 bucks a day it would pay for itself pretty quickly. Not sure what prices are by you but here you can get a brand new stove with auto-temp and a catalytic converter and everything installed for 10k to 12k, or get a decent used stove and have someone install it for 5k ±
Today is highly unusual. Never before in recorded history has the price climbed anywhere near this high. Last year we had record high electricity prices due to the Russian invasion of Ukraine and even then the average price for the year was 18c/kWh. This year it has been around 12c/kWh I think.
That’s akin to our rates, im about 13c/kwh delivered. I use about 1.2 to 1.5 mwh per month (with natural gas furnace and wood stove), so 2.50$/kwh would make me shut my house off at the breaker and call it camping.
How about a small propane heater, like a Mr Buddy type unit? Those can be connected to a extension hose and a 20lb propane tank, and are safe to use indoors with adequate ventilation.
I got one for emergency heat, and it can take 2 of the 1lb propane cylinders directly, or the 20lb tank with a hose. The 20lb tank could provide heat for over 24 hours but IDK how expensive propane is there. It cost me $18 for a 4-pack of the 1lb cylinders, and I think the 20lb ones are about $50 range.
So you’re BigDickEnergy in a granny cottage, heating the place with your wood to get off grid. Nice!
What was the price before the Ukrainian war?
You could get fixed price plans for around 5c/kwh. However take into account that yesterday was an anomaly. The average price for the last 28 days is 12.65c/kWh. During the summer time it was around 1 to 3c/kWh.
Someone said -45.5 °C
That is an insane price, and it feels like it should be illegal.
Further integration at an EU level would allow energy supply to be less influenced by local issues.
Spot rate pricing for electricity is uncommon among households for exactly this reason. The price is most likely the result of energy market conditions, rather than nefarious actors in the market intentionally manipulating market conditions.
Usually there’s a company that would be absorbing that risk of price fluctuations by charging slightly more than the baseline normal so that they can afford to charge households at a loss for the short periods where the price spikes as insanely as this.
Ouch.
Meanwhile, in Portugal, my peak energy price will be around €.10, with the minimum at around €.06
To what degree is your house insulated already?
Normal energy price in Finland around 0,04€ - 0,10€/kWh. Last year average was 0,068€/kWh
That is really nice.
That’s extremely cheap, compared to 0,35€ in Germany.
It’s a log cabin with 5cm added fibreglass insulation on the inside.
That’s a lot. And being a log cabin I wouldn’t add anything on the outside that would hide the wood. That is really harsh weather to endure.
-40 is eye buggingly cold. You could have a styrofoam house and I would still worry about being cold in it, plus y’know, the giant fire hazard.
Well after lighting the styrofoam you won’t feel cold anymore
But I like feeling vijif!
Lol I don’t know how that got autocorrected. Dutch is a funny language, but that isn’t a word…
Saves a pretty penny on refrigerating stuff but makes for a hard time to have a decent night of sleep.
And your remark on styrofoam hits hard with me.
I have an old house, nearly 100 years old, with a very poor score in thermal efficiency, that really needs some improvement but the idea of glueing highly combustible materials to the walls does not go well with me.
At least you can quick chill a beer!
I can’t drink…
At least you can quick chill a soda!
There’s that, I’ll admit.
How’s the heat pump gang doing in that kind of temperature?
It’s what I exclusively heat my house with
They are mostly ground source over there, which shouldn’t be affected by cold snaps.
They should be using supplement heat sources at that temperature.
Since it’s a cold area, they’re likely using a geothermal heat pump, which isn’t affected by air temperature. It uses the ground for heat exchange rather than the air.
Some of the modern air-source heat pumps can operate down to those temperatures. https://carbonswitch.com/best-cold-climate-heat-pump/
You’re right though, geothermal would be more likely currently and if that’s the case then the heat pump gang is doing just fine.
Definitely. I live in the San Francisco Bay Area where it doesn’t get too hot nor too cold, but I do still need heating during winter, and occasionally air conditioning during summer (maybe for 3 weeks or so, sporadically turning on during the day).
I bought the cheapest heat pump I could find that would work with my existing Ecobee thermostat (a Gree Flexx), and even that one says it’ll work down to -22F with a 1.25 COP
I’ve got solar panels, which made a heat pump a better choice than a new gas furnace.
Get her a space heater, you won’t even notice the difference in your bill.
I recommend getting one that blows air instead of one that just heats oil. I’ve used both types, and the one that blows air is way more effective.
Staying warm is not the issue. It’s the price for that comfort. Running a 1kW space heater for 24 hours at yesterday’s prices would have cost a little over 26 euros.
/s
No, I’m talking from experience.
It’s the difference between an additional $5 and $70 in my electric bill every month.
