hgraf wrote:

> Perhaps it's a house size thing? 

Probably not. 

> [...] and due to the open concept there are certain rooms that are so
> open to other rooms it wouldn't make sense to heat one and not the
> other. 

I think that's the main difference. In Germany, typically all rooms have
doors. No entry hall/living room/kitchen/den open space on the first floor.
Smaller living rooms, with doors. Kitchens with doors. Outside entry
doesn't go into any room; it goes into a ... I don't know how to call this,
I've never seen it in the US and therefore it never has came up :) Anyway,
it goes into a small hall or so, which is usually on a lower temperature.
>From there, the doors go into kitchen, living room etc.

Having different rooms on different temperatures is a very old concept (in
Germany, at least); it comes from having individual ovens in each room. So
the building style is adapted to that, which is IMO a requirement for the
whole thing to make sense.

> What are the savings to individual control compared to the way I do
> things (programmable thermostat) for a WELL insulated home? 

I think this is not only a function of insulation, it is also a function of
how the house is laid out. And of course a function of the insulation
between internal areas that will be on different temperatures. With
brick-and-mortar buildings, there is possibly more natural insulation than
with a typical woodframe house, but I'm not sure about that.

> Actually, it can be impossible, in the case of my brothers rooms. As a
> test we closed down ALL the outlets in the house except his room. The
> result? His room STILL was colder then the rest of the house, and my
> room (two outlets and right above the furnace) was still a few degrees
> above the rest of the house. Room to room control of more then a few
> degrees simply isn't a good idea with forced air. That is one benefit of
> a radiator type system, individual control is "guaranteed" to work.

I'm reasonably sure that a forced heat system can be made working, too --
but it probably needs to be designed in to avoid such irregularities.

> I am curious though, does anybody have info on the following: same size
> house, one with forced air, the other with radiators, which is more
> efficient and by how much? 

That would be interesting. But probably difficult to compare. There are
many things that affect this: insulation, room layout, use of the house,
how much you open the doors and windows, etc. 

> Personally I've lived with radiators and after buying a house with
> forced air I'll NEVER go back. 

For me it's the contrary. I don't like the classical radiators very much (I
prefer radiation heaters like stoves rather than convection heaters like
radiators :)

> I'm VERY sensitive to smells (I can tell the model of subway car in my
> transit system based purely on the smell of the air conditioning) and
> that was one thing I always hated about radiators. 

I'm sensitive to dust, and every house with air heating gave me bad
problems. The first thing I always did was to tape the shutters closed :)
The convection caused by radiators also causes dust to rise, but it's
usually possible to find a calm spot (which is one of the downsides you
mentioned :). The best in that respect are radiation heaters (and no
carpets).

Gerhard

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist