Shutting off indirect hot water while away or sleeping

Users who are viewing this thread

miracj

New Member
Messages
24
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Location
Boston, Massachusetts, USA
I have a 3 phase oil burner with a 60 gallon indirect hot water tank (Superstor single hull). It serves 2 full bathrooms, kitchen sink and dishwasher, and clothes washer. I currently have 2 people total living in the home, but it is a 3 bedroom house living in Boston, MA.

Does it make sense to shut down the hot water tank heating when away (Assume house never drops below 60F where tank is), or for part of the night? How much potential oil would be saved? Would this best be controlled with the circulator or the aquastat controls?

Related to this, is there a "Smart" internet enabled aquastat or similar?
 

Dana

In the trades
Messages
7,889
Reaction score
509
Points
113
Location
01609
It can make sense to turn it off when you're away for longer than a weekend, but turn the whole boiler off, not just the indirect.

Turning it off just the indirect to save the minimal standby loss over a single night isn't going to be "worth it".

Insulating all of the near-boiler plumbing to R3+ and turning down the storage temperature to no more than 140F will reduce standby loss far more than any overnight aquastat reduction setting on the indirect.

I'm not aware of any internet enabled aquastats for indirects, but there are probably a number of internet enabled power switches that could be put in series with the power to the pump serving the indirect, which would allow you to turn it on/off remotely (but not up or down.)

Assuming it's in a basement, air sealing and insulating the basement walls & band joists to the current code minimum performance (= R15 continous insulation, not thermally bridged by studs) is also WELL worth it, even if you're not using the basement as living space. MassSave will only subsidize the band joist and foundation sill portion- the wall-R is still up to you. There are good/better/best ways and expensive/cheap/cheaper ways of hitting that performance point for doing it without creating a mold farm. If you're interested in the details that's been covered multiple times on this forum, but I'd be willing to run through it again.

An 8" poured concrete wall is worth about R1. When it's 60F in the basement and 30F outside every square foot of above-grade exposed foundation is losing (60F-30F)/R1= 30 BTU/hr per square foot. The below grade portion is lossy too, but not losing as much, since below the frost line it's above 30F. If you have a perimeter of 120 feet and 2' of above grade exposure thats 240 square feet x 30BTU/hr = 7200 BTU/hr. Figure the below grade portion is going to roughly double that (despite being more than 2x the total area.) Call it 14,400 BTU/hr. A gallon of oil burned at 85% efficiency is delivering 117,300 BTU/hr, so every hour of 30F weather would be burning through 14,400/117,300 = 0.122 gallons of oil, even though you're not actively heating the basement. That's about a gallon or two per day in winter, a double-digit percentage of the total oil use.

With the basement insulted to R15 the basement temp will rise to about 65F, not 60F, and when it's 30F out the losses in the above example are (65-30F)/(R1 +R15)= 2.2 BTU/hr per square foot, only about 7.3% of the losses prior to insulating. So it would take about a half a month of cold weather to add up to the fuel that had been used in a single cold day, and over the entire winter the losses would only be about one week's worth of cold weather losses. The first floor's floor would be subtly warmer, and the basement far less clammy.
 
Last edited:

miracj

New Member
Messages
24
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Location
Boston, Massachusetts, USA
Thanks for the answer. My interest was not to shut off the entire boiler (which I can effectively do by turning down the temperature on the smart thermostats remotely for everything but the indirect hot water). In the summer I could shut the whole thing down, but in the winter, I need to keep the temperature warm enough to keep pipes from freezing.

My home is a 30' x 42' split level with a cement foundation of about 2 feet above grade and pretty much nothing below grade. The house is basically sitting on granite ledge. The basement is finished and is dry as a bone. There is some drywall and maybe some insulation covering the cement foundation on the inside (but I don't have high confidence in the original builder as to insulation), with the exception of the non-heated garage which probably has about 43' of exposed concrete and the 9' garage door.

All the hot boiler pipes are insulated with foam covers R3.3.

But if the numbers you are quoting for the cement foundation walls are close to reality, would solid foam boards, or fiberglass insulation or something else be good for replacing the foundations insulation?


Thanks!
 

Jadnashua

Retired Defense Industry Engineer xxx
Messages
32,770
Reaction score
1,190
Points
113
Location
New England
A couple of years ago when my boiler died, my indirect stayed hot enough to take 3-days worth of hot (but short) showers. It happened late on a Friday evening, and I really didn't want to pay weekend rates to fix it!

Assuming yours has decent insulation, with no hot water use, it may never call for heat over a weekend. Probably won't save much, if any, depending on the duration you're away.
 

Dana

In the trades
Messages
7,889
Reaction score
509
Points
113
Location
01609
Thanks for the answer. My interest was not to shut off the entire boiler (which I can effectively do by turning down the temperature on the smart thermostats remotely for everything but the indirect hot water). In the summer I could shut the whole thing down, but in the winter, I need to keep the temperature warm enough to keep pipes from freezing.

A simple wall switch in series with the pump for the indirect would turn off the indirect without changing any of the other controls. But the indirect doesn't lose heat very quickly- if it's just for the weekend or overnight, forget it- the energy savings would be effectively nil.


My home is a 30' x 42' split level with a cement foundation of about 2 feet above grade and pretty much nothing below grade. The house is basically sitting on granite ledge. The basement is finished and is dry as a bone. There is some drywall and maybe some insulation covering the cement foundation on the inside (but I don't have high confidence in the original builder as to insulation), with the exception of the non-heated garage which probably has about 43' of exposed concrete and the 9' garage door.

All the hot boiler pipes are insulated with foam covers R3.3.

But if the numbers you are quoting for the cement foundation walls are close to reality, would solid foam boards, or fiberglass insulation or something else be good for replacing the foundations insulation?


Thanks!

In your climate zone, if using fiberglass for any part of the wall insulation there needs to be at least R5 of rigid foam between R13 fiberglass and the foundation wall. Without a sufficient ratio of air-impermeable waterproof insulation there will be wintertime moisture accumulation in the fiberglass, and potential groundwater moisture year-round. To hit code-min performance that R5 has to be a continuous layer, not installed between stud framing.

A pretty good all-foam solution would be a continuous layer of 3" of reclaimed/used roofing polyiso foam board (R16.5-R17) strapped to the foundation wall with 1x4 furring through screwed to the wall with 4.5-5" masonry screws, mounting half-inch wallboard on the furring to meet fire codes. If going with virgin stock foil faced polyiso it can get there with just 2.5" if continuous, or 1" polyiso trapped to the wall a 2x4/R13 studwall.

Alternatively one could use 4" of EPS (if continuous) or 1.5" EPS + 2x4/R13.

With polyiso it's prudent to keep the cut bottom edge of the slab- polyiso can wick groundwater moisture even from a damp-ish slab that is never visibly wet. As little as 1/4" of clearance above the slab is enough if it literally never floods. With EPS it's fine to let it rest on the slab.

Avoid using XPS (pink, blue, green). Even though it's labeled R5 per inch of thickness, the performance boost over EPS (R3.9- R4.2 per inch) is only temporary. That boost is due HFC blowing agents used, all of which are EXTREME greenhouse gases now banned under the Kigali Amendment to the Montreal Protocol (the US isn't a signatory of the Amendment). As the HFCs diffuse out over time performance drops. XPS is only warranteed to R4.5/inch (read the fine print), but is likely to underperform even that mark in 40-50 years. The difference in environmental impact isn't subtle. Polyiso and EPS are blown with low-impact pentane variants at about 7x CO2 @ 100 years, most of which escapes the foam at the factory and is recaputured, not released into the atmosphere. That is compared to the industry standard HFC134a used for XPS at about 1400x CO2 @100 year, that slowly leaks out of the foam over decades.

CSMP-Insulation_090919-01.png


^^^Roofing polyiso is roughly comparable to HFO blown polyurethane in this chart, foil faced polyiso roughly on par with EPS.^^^

But used foam (any type) is the greener than any virgin-stock foam, since it is only extending the benefit of the initial environmental hit, piling on to the benefit side of the cost/benefit balance.

In eastern MA there are several vendors large & small selling reclaimed foam board at a steep discount, many of whom advertise here from time to time. The biggest are Nationwide Foam/Insulation Depot in Framingham, and Green Insulation Group in Worcester, but there are a handful of others.
 
Top
Hey, wait a minute.

This is awkward, but...

It looks like you're using an ad blocker. We get it, but (1) terrylove.com can't live without ads, and (2) ad blockers can cause issues with videos and comments. If you'd like to support the site, please allow ads.

If any particular ad is your REASON for blocking ads, please let us know. We might be able to do something about it. Thanks.
I've Disabled AdBlock    No Thanks