Programable thermostats use / uselessness in continuous occupancy setting...

 Looking at my electric bill now that I'm well into A/C season, it occurs
to me that the various recommendations for programmable thermostats
mainly rely on savings during unoccupied periods. Since I work from home
full time I have few unoccupied periods so having the house drift up to
90 degrees during the day while I'm trying to work isn't exactly
feasible. I also find I have less tolerance to higher temps when I'm
trying to sleep so a night setback won't cut it.

Anyone else run into this issue? Retirees? Thoughts?

Pete C.

 
    I am also home all day. Think about when the =outdoor unit=  is in the
shade. Lucky for me, it is only exposed to the sun during the hottest part
of the day, say, 10-4. I go to 72 at 930, 74 at 1pm, then to 71 at 630 when
the unit is well shaded, and then 69-70 at about 9pm after the sun has set
and thermal gain through the west end windows (massive Andersens) is over.
The thermal mass of the building (walls, floors, furnishings) tempers the
changes well, and the gentle up and down cycle keeps humidity and temps very
comfortable. I also have zoned units, one upstairs and one down. The U/S
unit figures are =one= degree higher, and the t-stat is in sync so that I
don't have cold air rushing down the stairs all the time.
    Another thing I've done is disable the programming to have the fan run
90 seconds after the compressor stops cooling. This way, the ducts remain
cooled and deliver cold air instantly when the fan starts. I also have a
ceiling fan over my bed and leave it on medium 24/7.
    Letting the building heat up to 90 and then cooling it down is foolish;
I have the chart to prove it. You save nothing if your home is any real
size. remember, you are not cooling just air, but the entire structure.
    Another HUGE issue is CFL's; using them not only cuts down in a big way
on your LIGHTING energy usage, but it also tremendously cuts down on the
need for your A/C to remove the thousands and thousands of BTU's of heat
incandescents generate. Again, I have a chart that proves it, using my Kw/h
billing from the power co.
    HTH,
    Jim

 Jim wrote:

The outdoor unit is fully shaded, it's on the north side of the house
and to the east and west there are very large oak trees that insure it
is shaded the entire day.


Brick exterior here so that mass helps contain the daily gain.


Single level here.


Ducts in hot attic so they wouldn't remain cool for long anyway. Got a
big attic fan that I run manually now and then, should probably put on a
thermostat. Some data logging wouldn't be a bad idea either.


Right, and when you're there all the time you don't have any periods
when you can tolerate the higher temperature anyway. Best you can do is
to cool the house a bit more in the evening when it's cooler and let the
thermal mass help reduce A/C load during the day.


Been there, done that. I have CFLs in all regular use locations, only a
few stray incandescent in infrequently used locations. Daytime usually
requires no artificial lighting most of the time anyway.

Pete C.

 Sounds like you have the situation well in hand; we should be asking for
=your= advice!

 

What's a Kw/h?

Nick