Thermostat VS Thermostat

**homemaker66** · 10-18-2008, 08:09 AM

OK, my DH and I are having this discussion the other day. I think the old time thermostat is more cost effective and he seems to think the programmable is more effective. We have the programable one and I have it set so it is at 60 durning the day and late night and 68 when everyone is home. He seems to think it takes longer to heat up the home vs keeping it at one steady heat all day long. So everyone who is right me or DH.

**hmcart** · 10-18-2008, 08:51 AM

hmmm, I am not sure but my Dh would agree with the programmable one being more cost effective.

**Ceashels** · 10-18-2008, 09:09 AM

Originally Posted by homemaker66

OK, my DH and I are having this discussion the other day. I think the old time thermostat is more cost effective and he seems to think the programmable is more effective. We have the programable one and I have it set so it is at 60 durning the day and late night and 68 when everyone is home. He seems to think it takes longer to heat up the home vs keeping it at one steady heat all day long. So everyone who is right me or DH.

Well, it will take longer to heat up the home if it is starting at 60F.

Is it cost effective is a different question.
It will take a certain amount of energy to heat and maintain 60F.
It will take a certain amount of energy to heat and maintain 68F.
It will take a certain amount of energy to bring 60F to 68F.

Is the energy requirement to bring the house up to 68F more than or less than the cost of maintaining 68F for the specified time?

a sample experiment:

1) Take a look at your electric meter and determine how much kw is needed to maintain the 68F temperature.

2) Then one morning when you are home, determine how much is needed and how long it takes to bring the temp up to 68F.

3) What costs less?

Keep in mind you have other electrical and gas uses happening in your home so there are other variables that need to be considered.

**jdr250** · 10-18-2008, 09:51 AM

I don't know. I use a digital thermostat though because they are more accurate thus ensuring you aren't overheating or underheating your house. I also read one time that keeping your house at one steady temperature is more cost effective because each time you try to raise the temp in your house you are not only heating the air but you have to rewarm the walls, furniture floor etc. But to be honest I read that about central air/heating systems that suggested keeping your house 1 temp all year long.
This year we went to wood heat for our secondary heating source. For the previous years we used kerosene heaters as our secondary heat source. So at night we would turn thermostat down to 60 and in the morning turn it back up to 70 and light the kerosene heater which would maintain the heat once the furnace got the house to 70 so my furnace didn't run all day long only at night or when we left and shut off the kerosene heater. This year I'm not sure exactly how we're going to do it because the wood burner seems to work more efficiently to keep the house warm it's gone down to the high 30's here and we haven't run the furnace yet this year, but we can have the wood burner running even at night and when we're not here.
So really I didn't answer your question....LOL