Originally Posted by woodbe
Well, it's very quiet, clean, and convenient. We just set an upper and a lower temperature, and the system does the rest. Once every month or so, I drag the filter out of it and hose the dust out of it. It's very impressive. Did I mention it is very clean yet? If not, it's very clean. It removes dust, not adds dust.
Anyway, ours is a big ducted system that uses water pumped around underground instead of the air outside. I think they call it 'geothermal heat pump' they reckon it gets a 5:1 output:input ratio versus a 3:1 for the air interchange systems. It seems to keep the place a comfortable temperature, but unfortunately there is no outlet in the workshop :(
Cost to run? Heaps, but it IS a big house. When we installed it, we had a quote for ducted gas heating that was going to cost more to run than we are paying for heating AND cooling now, per year. That was 10 years ago. So we are getting the cooling for free...
These days, we'd probably go for several of those split systems with the confusing remote controls and regular breakdowns. I hear that the efficiency of them has improved out of sight, but there is no direct comparisons available so it might just be marketing-speak.
Anyway, I guess this is a long way of saying that there is no easy way of comparing burning wood with reverse cycle, but if you record how much wood you burn in a year, you might be able to make an informed decision about your own situation. Bear in mind that the electricity you use in a reverse cycle system probably comes from a coal-fired generator, so who knows what the bottom-line efficiency really is :)
Hope I haven't confused you, I know I am... :D
woodbe.