Heating an empty house
January 4, 2009 5:06 AM Subscribe
When I was out of town, my landlord came in and turned the heating on in the house I'm renting from him. This is in the UK.
I am renting a terraced house in a cold climate in the north of the UK. When I left town for Christmas for two weeks, I turned the heating and the hot water off. I had also given permission to the landlord to enter the house to perform some minor repairs.
When I came back, the heating had been switched back on. It was set to 17.5 C (about 64F) and was on the continuous heat setting, even though the thermostat is easily programmable (we generally have it come on twice a day for two hours total when we're home).
I asked the landlord about this and he said "I turned the heat on low which is all that's required when out of town."
I'm really quite upset about this as I've been working hard to keep the heating bills down by following tips that I read online about how to save energy, wearing extra layers when inside, using the programmable thermostat, etc. But now the heat has been on constantly and I wasn't even here to enjoy it! I imagine the landlord did this to prevent the pipes from freezing, but this seems very much like overkill as the house is a modern terrace, well-insulated, and I don't believe there are any exposed pipes.
The landlord is very nice and friendly so I'm not sure what to do. Any ideas?
I am renting a terraced house in a cold climate in the north of the UK. When I left town for Christmas for two weeks, I turned the heating and the hot water off. I had also given permission to the landlord to enter the house to perform some minor repairs.
When I came back, the heating had been switched back on. It was set to 17.5 C (about 64F) and was on the continuous heat setting, even though the thermostat is easily programmable (we generally have it come on twice a day for two hours total when we're home).
I asked the landlord about this and he said "I turned the heat on low which is all that's required when out of town."
I'm really quite upset about this as I've been working hard to keep the heating bills down by following tips that I read online about how to save energy, wearing extra layers when inside, using the programmable thermostat, etc. But now the heat has been on constantly and I wasn't even here to enjoy it! I imagine the landlord did this to prevent the pipes from freezing, but this seems very much like overkill as the house is a modern terrace, well-insulated, and I don't believe there are any exposed pipes.
The landlord is very nice and friendly so I'm not sure what to do. Any ideas?
You gave him permission to enter the house, so it's not like he broke in or anything. That's important.
And while you are doing the right thing by trying to reduce your heating bills, this house is as you said "in a cold climate in the north of the UK" and you were gone for two entire weeks. While turning all the heating and water off to save money while you're not there probably seems like a fair gamble to you, I also think that conversely, if you actually owned the pipes in question, you might feel differently.
Sure, you're willing to bet nothing will freeze, crack and then flood, but the house is unattended for two weeks and he probably isn't. The consequences if you're wrong are potentially massive and costly to him in terms of insurance, repairs, rehousing you, and replacement.
Both positions are reasonable, so since having a landlord who is "very nice and friendly" is worth quite a lot, I wouldn't make a big deal of this. Next year, however, I would leave the landlord a note saying you have the thermostat set to come on twice a day for two hours to keep hot water circulating, or come to an agreement with him on vacation procedures so he is comfortable this is covered.
posted by DarlingBri at 5:18 AM on January 4, 2009 [6 favorites]
And while you are doing the right thing by trying to reduce your heating bills, this house is as you said "in a cold climate in the north of the UK" and you were gone for two entire weeks. While turning all the heating and water off to save money while you're not there probably seems like a fair gamble to you, I also think that conversely, if you actually owned the pipes in question, you might feel differently.
Sure, you're willing to bet nothing will freeze, crack and then flood, but the house is unattended for two weeks and he probably isn't. The consequences if you're wrong are potentially massive and costly to him in terms of insurance, repairs, rehousing you, and replacement.
Both positions are reasonable, so since having a landlord who is "very nice and friendly" is worth quite a lot, I wouldn't make a big deal of this. Next year, however, I would leave the landlord a note saying you have the thermostat set to come on twice a day for two hours to keep hot water circulating, or come to an agreement with him on vacation procedures so he is comfortable this is covered.
posted by DarlingBri at 5:18 AM on January 4, 2009 [6 favorites]
I agree with DarlingBri; and besides it doesn't take much for the pipes to freeze if, for example, you have an outside tap. Having experienced this for myself I can vouch for the fact that it is incredibly disruptive, and may include several hours of no water/heating at all whilst the plumber fixes the problem.
Twice a day for an hour or so is sufficient, and is definitely worth it, to come back to an intact house - for you and the owner. In my renting days, this was often one of the clauses in my contract.
(I do sympathise with the cost, though, but budget for my heating bills over the entire year so even when I'm away I know that I can cover the cost)
posted by highrise at 5:53 AM on January 4, 2009
Twice a day for an hour or so is sufficient, and is definitely worth it, to come back to an intact house - for you and the owner. In my renting days, this was often one of the clauses in my contract.
(I do sympathise with the cost, though, but budget for my heating bills over the entire year so even when I'm away I know that I can cover the cost)
posted by highrise at 5:53 AM on January 4, 2009
Response by poster: Thanks for the answers. I'm calming down but I just want to clarify - the landlord did NOT put the heating on for two hours a day, although this was an option (the "auto" setting). He put the heating on for 24 hours a day (the "continuous" setting). If he'd put it on for the two hours that would have been no big deal, but putting it on continuously is going to be 12x more expensive than what we usually pay for heating when we're home!
posted by hazyjane at 5:59 AM on January 4, 2009
posted by hazyjane at 5:59 AM on January 4, 2009
Are you sure it was the *heat* that was continuous? My thermostat doesn't allow that, but instead has a setting for the *fan* to be on continuously. The heating (gas or electric) then cycles on or off as appropriate for the set temperature. I'd be very suprised if this wasn't what happened here, especially since you note that the thermostat was set to a particular temperature. Otherwise, what's the point of having a temp setting if the heat is truly "on" all the time? Also, it'd be sweltering.
Leaving the fan running seems reasonable, since it's pretty cheap to run compared to heat. Also this would distribute the heat better even while the burner was off.
That temperature seems high though. Something like 50 degrees seems like it would be fine, though I've never lived somewhere that froze regularly.
posted by RikiTikiTavi at 6:15 AM on January 4, 2009
Leaving the fan running seems reasonable, since it's pretty cheap to run compared to heat. Also this would distribute the heat better even while the burner was off.
That temperature seems high though. Something like 50 degrees seems like it would be fine, though I've never lived somewhere that froze regularly.
posted by RikiTikiTavi at 6:15 AM on January 4, 2009
If a thermostat governs then you are only demanding heat when the thermostat is below 64F, which is probably not anything like continuous heating - the boiler is on, but not firing. You've spent more than you might have, but it still shouldn't be outrageous.
We keep our house at 17C max in the winter (East Anglia), 13 at night, and go for the layered look. I think 17.5C is high for a "minimum setting" - 10-12C would seem sufficient for this. Enough to kick in well before the frost comes in. We have noticed this winter that other issues such as damp apply when the temperature is very low - cold spots on walls condense moisture, for instance).
Working all the angles to save on home heating costs, I appreciate what you've done and said, but apart from the high temperature I don't think the landlord has been particularly unreasonable. I know from sharing party walls with a vacant terraced house that a cold terraced house puts the burden on the neighbours, as the party walls are not usually insulated. I think I would chalk this up to experience and move on.
posted by sagwalla at 6:23 AM on January 4, 2009 [1 favorite]
We keep our house at 17C max in the winter (East Anglia), 13 at night, and go for the layered look. I think 17.5C is high for a "minimum setting" - 10-12C would seem sufficient for this. Enough to kick in well before the frost comes in. We have noticed this winter that other issues such as damp apply when the temperature is very low - cold spots on walls condense moisture, for instance).
Working all the angles to save on home heating costs, I appreciate what you've done and said, but apart from the high temperature I don't think the landlord has been particularly unreasonable. I know from sharing party walls with a vacant terraced house that a cold terraced house puts the burden on the neighbours, as the party walls are not usually insulated. I think I would chalk this up to experience and move on.
posted by sagwalla at 6:23 AM on January 4, 2009 [1 favorite]
Aye, sorry, I was really trying to persuade you that it's best to have your heating on when you're away - and not addressing the crux of the issue.
It is a bit of a liberty for your landlord to switch the heating on constant if you are not there; I would assume they made a mistake.
However I would wait until the bill comes - there's not much you can do until then. You may find that it's not as bad as you are expecting, however I'm guessing that if it's a great deal more than you usually pay you are hoping for some kind of arrangement with your landlord (reduced rent, whatever) I don't know your landlord, so I couldn't say whether or not they would do this - you could ask if you feel that you have a good enough relationship to do so.
posted by highrise at 6:23 AM on January 4, 2009
It is a bit of a liberty for your landlord to switch the heating on constant if you are not there; I would assume they made a mistake.
However I would wait until the bill comes - there's not much you can do until then. You may find that it's not as bad as you are expecting, however I'm guessing that if it's a great deal more than you usually pay you are hoping for some kind of arrangement with your landlord (reduced rent, whatever) I don't know your landlord, so I couldn't say whether or not they would do this - you could ask if you feel that you have a good enough relationship to do so.
posted by highrise at 6:23 AM on January 4, 2009
According to your post, it sounds like you turned the heat (and hot water!!) entirely off for 2 weeks. If so, that's a highly irresponsible thing to do. Your landlord was completely right, especially since it's not his responsibility to figure out your programmable thermostat.
posted by TypographicalError at 6:28 AM on January 4, 2009 [7 favorites]
posted by TypographicalError at 6:28 AM on January 4, 2009 [7 favorites]
If it helps for most thermostats setting the thermostat to 17.5 degrees continuous setting means the temperature is maintained at 17.5, not that it's on all the time. So in actual fact if it's a fairly standard house you will probably have it coming on occasionally.
I live in the south and do this when I go away during the winter, it's added about 30UKP for about 3.5 weeks to my bill. YMMV.
posted by gadha at 6:33 AM on January 4, 2009 [1 favorite]
I live in the south and do this when I go away during the winter, it's added about 30UKP for about 3.5 weeks to my bill. YMMV.
posted by gadha at 6:33 AM on January 4, 2009 [1 favorite]
I'm of two competing opinions on this:
1- You pay for the heat, you get to control it. If the landlord wants control over the heat, he ought to pay for it. (Of course, what that really means is higher rent.)
2- The landlord has the right and the obligation to his property and other renters to not let pipes freeze and whatnot. He probably should put a codicil in the lease stating that the heat MUST be maintained at some minimum so the pipes don't freeze. I think something like 5c would be fine.
But I'm a fat, ugly American who keeps his heat at 80 and the air conditioning at 70. To be fair, I pay for it and it's natural gas and nuclear generated electricity. If there was a more green option, I'd use it. (And I expect there will be soon with deregulation- I believe I will soon be able to choose any electricity provider I want, and I will choose a renewable one when that time comes.) (And also, it's a condo. I don't have many options regarding added insulation and adding solar/wind/geothermal.)
posted by gjc at 6:35 AM on January 4, 2009
1- You pay for the heat, you get to control it. If the landlord wants control over the heat, he ought to pay for it. (Of course, what that really means is higher rent.)
2- The landlord has the right and the obligation to his property and other renters to not let pipes freeze and whatnot. He probably should put a codicil in the lease stating that the heat MUST be maintained at some minimum so the pipes don't freeze. I think something like 5c would be fine.
But I'm a fat, ugly American who keeps his heat at 80 and the air conditioning at 70. To be fair, I pay for it and it's natural gas and nuclear generated electricity. If there was a more green option, I'd use it. (And I expect there will be soon with deregulation- I believe I will soon be able to choose any electricity provider I want, and I will choose a renewable one when that time comes.) (And also, it's a condo. I don't have many options regarding added insulation and adding solar/wind/geothermal.)
posted by gjc at 6:35 AM on January 4, 2009
Your actions put his property at serious risk. A burst pipe can not only destroy your belongings, it can also rot wood framing, plaster walls, potentially short electrical systems causing a fire, cause mold to take root within the walls and floors… This doesn't even take the added liability your landlord would be shackled with because of your negligence.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 6:36 AM on January 4, 2009 [3 favorites]
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 6:36 AM on January 4, 2009 [3 favorites]
He probably should put a codicil in the lease stating that the heat MUST be maintained at some minimum so the pipes don't freeze.
Such a thing is very common, at least in the part of America where I live, with cold but not awful winters.
Also, hazyjane: I'm not sure you understand how a thermostat works. The amount that your furnace worked while you were away is likely only about 4-5 hr a day all told.
Here's how it goes - when the temperature in your house gets lower than what the thermostat is set at, the furnace comes on, and runs until the temperature is 1-2 degrees above what the thermostat is set at. If the thermostat is set at 17.5 (which, incidentally, is only a very little bit higher than the minimum if you want to keep your pipes) "continuously", it's actually only consuming energy when the furnace is running. That is, only when the temperature in your house dips below 17.5.
Your strategy, on the other hand, of setting the furnace for only 4 hours a day, actually accomplishes about the same thing. Presumably, during that 4 hours, the furnace is running continuously, considering that for the rest of the day, the temperature in your house is dropping pretty low.
I think you have totally misunderstood the purpose of a programmable thermostat, which is to lower the temperature of the house when you're not there or while you're asleep to something which will result in your pipes not freezing, but would not be comfortable for you. So, during the hours of 9 am - 4 pm and 12 am - 7 am, you put it on 17 or so, but while you're up and about, you put it on a more comfortable 18.
posted by TypographicalError at 6:47 AM on January 4, 2009 [1 favorite]
Such a thing is very common, at least in the part of America where I live, with cold but not awful winters.
Also, hazyjane: I'm not sure you understand how a thermostat works. The amount that your furnace worked while you were away is likely only about 4-5 hr a day all told.
Here's how it goes - when the temperature in your house gets lower than what the thermostat is set at, the furnace comes on, and runs until the temperature is 1-2 degrees above what the thermostat is set at. If the thermostat is set at 17.5 (which, incidentally, is only a very little bit higher than the minimum if you want to keep your pipes) "continuously", it's actually only consuming energy when the furnace is running. That is, only when the temperature in your house dips below 17.5.
Your strategy, on the other hand, of setting the furnace for only 4 hours a day, actually accomplishes about the same thing. Presumably, during that 4 hours, the furnace is running continuously, considering that for the rest of the day, the temperature in your house is dropping pretty low.
I think you have totally misunderstood the purpose of a programmable thermostat, which is to lower the temperature of the house when you're not there or while you're asleep to something which will result in your pipes not freezing, but would not be comfortable for you. So, during the hours of 9 am - 4 pm and 12 am - 7 am, you put it on 17 or so, but while you're up and about, you put it on a more comfortable 18.
posted by TypographicalError at 6:47 AM on January 4, 2009 [1 favorite]
put it on a more comfortable 18
I overestimated the silliness of C. This should read 19-20.
Also, I didn't quite finish a thought: the minimum temperature not to freeze out your pipes is around 13 C. This is, you'll notice, pretty far from freezing. That's because 13 C is the temperature at the thermostat. In a cold part of your house in the wall is going to be much colder. Any lower than 13 C, and you run the risk of colder parts of your walls rolling into freezing territory.
posted by TypographicalError at 6:54 AM on January 4, 2009
I overestimated the silliness of C. This should read 19-20.
Also, I didn't quite finish a thought: the minimum temperature not to freeze out your pipes is around 13 C. This is, you'll notice, pretty far from freezing. That's because 13 C is the temperature at the thermostat. In a cold part of your house in the wall is going to be much colder. Any lower than 13 C, and you run the risk of colder parts of your walls rolling into freezing territory.
posted by TypographicalError at 6:54 AM on January 4, 2009
It was set to 17.5 C (about 64F) and was on the continuous heat setting [...] the house is a modern terrace, well-insulated
Being in a terrace and leeching heat from your neighbours only works if their heating is on. If they think the same thing you did and leave their heating off hoping your heating will keep their house warm, you would both end up with cold houses.
If the house is well insulated enough that the pipes wouldn't freeze with the heating turned off, it's well insulated enough that your heating bills should be fairly minimal - you've got a thermostat, after all, so you only end up paying for heat that escapes the (well insulated) house.
In other words, I think the most you can say is that the landlord could have chosen a lower temperature setting for the thermostat.
posted by Mike1024 at 7:04 AM on January 4, 2009
Being in a terrace and leeching heat from your neighbours only works if their heating is on. If they think the same thing you did and leave their heating off hoping your heating will keep their house warm, you would both end up with cold houses.
If the house is well insulated enough that the pipes wouldn't freeze with the heating turned off, it's well insulated enough that your heating bills should be fairly minimal - you've got a thermostat, after all, so you only end up paying for heat that escapes the (well insulated) house.
In other words, I think the most you can say is that the landlord could have chosen a lower temperature setting for the thermostat.
posted by Mike1024 at 7:04 AM on January 4, 2009
If it was on continuous heat on a thermostat, then all it did was maintain the ambient temperature at 17.5C. I would imagine that it clicked on and off maybe half a dozen times during the day. Our house is set to do this in the winter, and it'll, at most, add a few quid to your bill over a 14 day period.
Most rent contracts in the UK have clauses about leaving heating to run in the winter so as not to freeze the pipes. Your landlord did nothing wrong and it has likely cost you next to nothing (and certainly less time, effort and stress than dealing with the fallout from a burst pipe or legal action for breaching the terms of your lease).
Let it go.
posted by Happy Dave at 7:14 AM on January 4, 2009 [1 favorite]
Most rent contracts in the UK have clauses about leaving heating to run in the winter so as not to freeze the pipes. Your landlord did nothing wrong and it has likely cost you next to nothing (and certainly less time, effort and stress than dealing with the fallout from a burst pipe or legal action for breaching the terms of your lease).
Let it go.
posted by Happy Dave at 7:14 AM on January 4, 2009 [1 favorite]
Overall I'd let it go but 17.5°C is too high. 14-15°C is better.
posted by i_cola at 7:22 AM on January 4, 2009
posted by i_cola at 7:22 AM on January 4, 2009
Response by poster: Thanks again everyone. I've now come 'round to the opinion that I really shouldn't have turned the heat off completely when I left. To be honest, I didn't even think of the possibility that the pipes might freeze when I left, and only thought of it when I came back as a possible explanation for why the landlord had turned the heat on. I've just moved here from a warmer climate and never had to worry about this type of thing before.
I still think that 17.5 is too high, though, but whatever, I will try to "let it go," as Happy Dave says (as probably an attitude like that is where the "happy" comes from in the first place).
One thing I still don't understand is the idea that the heating should only come on a few times a day even when it is on the continuous heat setting. Right now I can hear the gas ignite once every 5-10 minutes or so, run for about a minute, and stop, as I am sitting right by the boiler (which is built into the gas fire in the living room - although the fire itself is almost never switched on).
posted by hazyjane at 7:28 AM on January 4, 2009 [2 favorites]
I still think that 17.5 is too high, though, but whatever, I will try to "let it go," as Happy Dave says (as probably an attitude like that is where the "happy" comes from in the first place).
One thing I still don't understand is the idea that the heating should only come on a few times a day even when it is on the continuous heat setting. Right now I can hear the gas ignite once every 5-10 minutes or so, run for about a minute, and stop, as I am sitting right by the boiler (which is built into the gas fire in the living room - although the fire itself is almost never switched on).
posted by hazyjane at 7:28 AM on January 4, 2009 [2 favorites]
There's always been an anti-pipe-burst clause in all leases I've signed here in the US. And, typically, the stated minimum temperature is 65.
posted by ick at 7:30 AM on January 4, 2009
posted by ick at 7:30 AM on January 4, 2009
Wow, hazyjane - sense and reconciliation? You're going to lose your internet pass!
Seriously, 64F is about at the top of the "pipes won't freeze" range, and the landlord would have a legal right to ensure his property isn't damaged by negligence. Granted, 55F/13C is where *I* would put it normally, but if I knew the pipes were unusually sensitive (uninsulated outer wall run) I'd go higher - and/or leave a faucet dripping.
I sympathize with your parsimony - I'm all there, personally! - but your landlord did the prudent thing, and I'm impressed you have come to terms with it.
posted by IAmBroom at 7:35 AM on January 4, 2009
Seriously, 64F is about at the top of the "pipes won't freeze" range, and the landlord would have a legal right to ensure his property isn't damaged by negligence. Granted, 55F/13C is where *I* would put it normally, but if I knew the pipes were unusually sensitive (uninsulated outer wall run) I'd go higher - and/or leave a faucet dripping.
I sympathize with your parsimony - I'm all there, personally! - but your landlord did the prudent thing, and I'm impressed you have come to terms with it.
posted by IAmBroom at 7:35 AM on January 4, 2009
One thing I still don't understand is the idea that the heating should only come on a few times a day even when it is on the continuous heat setting. Right now I can hear the gas ignite once every 5-10 minutes or so, run for about a minute, and stop, as I am sitting right by the boiler (which is built into the gas fire in the living room - although the fire itself is almost never switched on).
It doesn't just come on a few times a day. It comes on every 5-20 minutes (depending on how your thermostat is programmed) and runs for 1-5 minutes. This maintains the temperature right around thermostat setting. It will come on less often if it's warmer outside, more often if it's colder.
posted by TypographicalError at 7:57 AM on January 4, 2009
It doesn't just come on a few times a day. It comes on every 5-20 minutes (depending on how your thermostat is programmed) and runs for 1-5 minutes. This maintains the temperature right around thermostat setting. It will come on less often if it's warmer outside, more often if it's colder.
posted by TypographicalError at 7:57 AM on January 4, 2009
The thermostat should have been set to come on twice a day, either by you or your landlord. Our house is really drafty and leaving it on 24 hours at 17 degrees essentially means it's on 24 hours a day. That's how poorly insulated our house is. Your mileage may differ but if your house is poorly insulated, you could be in for a big bill.
That said, you definitely don't want to turn the heat off for two weeks straight. We did that once and although the pipes didn't freeze, it was so cold in the house when we returned that it literally took days to bring the heat back up to a decent level. So we got hit with enough big heating bill just heating the house back up again.
Next time set it to come on twice a day for a few hours.
posted by gfrobe at 8:39 AM on January 4, 2009
That said, you definitely don't want to turn the heat off for two weeks straight. We did that once and although the pipes didn't freeze, it was so cold in the house when we returned that it literally took days to bring the heat back up to a decent level. So we got hit with enough big heating bill just heating the house back up again.
Next time set it to come on twice a day for a few hours.
posted by gfrobe at 8:39 AM on January 4, 2009
I just went on vacation and I told my landlord I'd be setting the heat to 55 degrees (12.7 C). He pays the heat. I live in NY and it was anywhere from 10-35 degrees (-12 to 2 C) while I was gone. He said thanks for saving him some money and not letting his pipes freeze.
Your landlord was probably being a bit passive/aggressive (not mature but what can you do, move?) when he saw that you turned the heat totally off, saving you a few dollars but potentially costing him much more.
posted by Brian Puccio at 8:47 AM on January 4, 2009
Your landlord was probably being a bit passive/aggressive (not mature but what can you do, move?) when he saw that you turned the heat totally off, saving you a few dollars but potentially costing him much more.
posted by Brian Puccio at 8:47 AM on January 4, 2009
You're not going to pay 12 times more because the heat was set to continuous for the time you were gone.
Even though the heat was set higher than you normally have it (for 12 times longer than you normally use it apparently) heating your home isn't like using a light bulb. The furnace wasn't running full bore for the full time you were gone. It was turning on and off to maintain temp it was set at. I think you'll find that the bill isn't all that much higher.
By comparison I live very cold winter climate in the United States. Last week the outside temperature was in the negative. The difference between warm enough to be comfortable and cold enough to need bulky layers, in terms of my monthly energy bill... is negligible enough that I error on the side of comfort. All this in a big drafty colonial built in the 1930s.
posted by JFitzpatrick at 9:04 AM on January 4, 2009
Even though the heat was set higher than you normally have it (for 12 times longer than you normally use it apparently) heating your home isn't like using a light bulb. The furnace wasn't running full bore for the full time you were gone. It was turning on and off to maintain temp it was set at. I think you'll find that the bill isn't all that much higher.
By comparison I live very cold winter climate in the United States. Last week the outside temperature was in the negative. The difference between warm enough to be comfortable and cold enough to need bulky layers, in terms of my monthly energy bill... is negligible enough that I error on the side of comfort. All this in a big drafty colonial built in the 1930s.
posted by JFitzpatrick at 9:04 AM on January 4, 2009
Right now I can hear the gas ignite once every 5-10 minutes or so, run for about a minute, and stop, as I am sitting right by the boiler
Thats normal. The amount of gas it uses for a minute is miniscule yet it maintains the temperature set on the thermostat. Let the machine do its job.
posted by damn dirty ape at 11:02 AM on January 4, 2009
Thats normal. The amount of gas it uses for a minute is miniscule yet it maintains the temperature set on the thermostat. Let the machine do its job.
posted by damn dirty ape at 11:02 AM on January 4, 2009
I used to be a landlord, and my rental agreement required that the apartment be kept warm enough to protect pipes. But 64 all day? I live in the Northeast US, and 65 is as warm as I ever set the (programmable) thermostat. When away, I set it at 45 or 50F, though I benefit from passive solar. When you get your bill, talk to the landlord, and ask to work something out. It's difficult to overstate how important it is to be non-adversarial, reasonable, good-natured and polite. Landlords get a lot of unreasonable crap (and some give it, I know), so they can be pretty defensive.
posted by theora55 at 11:51 AM on January 4, 2009
posted by theora55 at 11:51 AM on January 4, 2009
I think two actions of the thermostat are being corn-fused here. There is the set point, and the programmability. The set point is the temperature you want the heater to maintain. When it goes below this, heat turns on. When it goes above, heat turns off. The program mode merely changes the set point based on time of day. If the "program" mode is off, then "continuous" mode is on. That just means the thermostat won't make any adjustments based on time- it will continue to maintain the temperature at the one set point all day.
Right now I can hear the gas ignite once every 5-10 minutes or so, run for about a minute, and stop, as I am sitting right by the boiler
Thats normal. The amount of gas it uses for a minute is miniscule yet it maintains the temperature set on the thermostat. Let the machine do its job.
Depends... There's a setting in most thermostats for the temperature spread of when it goes on and off. This one sounds like its set a little "tight" meaning it maintains the temperature at a very even rate- lots of minor adjustments. Depends on the type of heater, but in some, this kind of operation can be inefficient. So you widen up the range so that the heater runs longer, less often. It's a trade off between comfort and extracting the best efficiency.
posted by gjc at 1:04 PM on January 4, 2009
Right now I can hear the gas ignite once every 5-10 minutes or so, run for about a minute, and stop, as I am sitting right by the boiler
Thats normal. The amount of gas it uses for a minute is miniscule yet it maintains the temperature set on the thermostat. Let the machine do its job.
Depends... There's a setting in most thermostats for the temperature spread of when it goes on and off. This one sounds like its set a little "tight" meaning it maintains the temperature at a very even rate- lots of minor adjustments. Depends on the type of heater, but in some, this kind of operation can be inefficient. So you widen up the range so that the heater runs longer, less often. It's a trade off between comfort and extracting the best efficiency.
posted by gjc at 1:04 PM on January 4, 2009
Right now I can hear the gas ignite once every 5-10 minutes or so, run for about a minute, and stop, as I am sitting right by the boiler
Does the boiler take care of your hot water too? If so, that would be the hot water heater keeping the hot water supply topped up (so that you only have to wait a moment for hot water when you turn the tap on).
posted by different at 1:57 PM on January 4, 2009
Does the boiler take care of your hot water too? If so, that would be the hot water heater keeping the hot water supply topped up (so that you only have to wait a moment for hot water when you turn the tap on).
posted by different at 1:57 PM on January 4, 2009
If the pipes became frozen and burst, his insurance policy would probably not cover do to the fact that you knowingly turned the heat off. Consider yourself lucky that you're not stuck with paying for thousands in damages. (from what I know, negligence by tenants is generally not covered).
posted by jazzman at 3:18 PM on January 4, 2009
posted by jazzman at 3:18 PM on January 4, 2009
Also, around here (Canada) at least, insurance policies do not cover flood damage from burst pipes if there hasn't been someone in the house at least once every 24 hours.
posted by winston at 6:30 PM on January 4, 2009
posted by winston at 6:30 PM on January 4, 2009
i think you are also confusing how a thermostat works. like others above have stated, if your landlord set the thermostat at 64F, your heater only activates when the temperature dips below 64F to maintain that set temperature of 64F—it is not running all day as you seem to believe.
you state that your thermostat is programmable. what that means is that you can set the temperature at different degrees throughout the day. for instance, my programmable thermostat allows me to set a temperature for morning, afternoon, and evening (as well as weekday and weekend schedules). that way, the thermostat will automatically change to a lower temperature during hours that i am sleeping or at work, but and go up when i am in the house. your landlord likely didn't bother programming all the different temps and just set an across the board temperature. and while 64F is higher than what i would set the house 24 hours a day (i set it below 60F while i am sleeping), it is only a degree or two above what i set it to when i am gone (and i set the temp to 68F when i am in the house—i am also a conscious heat user and tend to layer up or i may bump it up a degree or two if am feeling especially cold).
so again, your thermostat is not running all day and you should find that your bill won't be as high as you are imagining it will be. it probably really won't be a whole lot more than what you normally pay. and it would definitely be a lot cheaper than repairing burst pipes.
posted by violetk at 8:42 PM on January 4, 2009
you state that your thermostat is programmable. what that means is that you can set the temperature at different degrees throughout the day. for instance, my programmable thermostat allows me to set a temperature for morning, afternoon, and evening (as well as weekday and weekend schedules). that way, the thermostat will automatically change to a lower temperature during hours that i am sleeping or at work, but and go up when i am in the house. your landlord likely didn't bother programming all the different temps and just set an across the board temperature. and while 64F is higher than what i would set the house 24 hours a day (i set it below 60F while i am sleeping), it is only a degree or two above what i set it to when i am gone (and i set the temp to 68F when i am in the house—i am also a conscious heat user and tend to layer up or i may bump it up a degree or two if am feeling especially cold).
so again, your thermostat is not running all day and you should find that your bill won't be as high as you are imagining it will be. it probably really won't be a whole lot more than what you normally pay. and it would definitely be a lot cheaper than repairing burst pipes.
posted by violetk at 8:42 PM on January 4, 2009
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by raztaj at 5:16 AM on January 4, 2009