From Newsgroup: alt.home.repair

A couple decade old oil burner heats my home. Question: Is it more cost effective to turn down the heat while sleeping and then increase the thermostat during the day, or to more or less keep the thermostat near constant?

I've done the former (turning it down at night) since I can remember
but, with the severely below normal temps outdoors lately, it has to run
a long time to get up to room temp during the day, which has caused me
to rethink my process.

Thanks.
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.home.repair

On 2/3/2026 10:34 AM, Harvey Sanenbum wrote:

A couple decade old oil burner heats my home.-a Question: Is it more cost effective to turn down the heat while sleeping and then increase the thermostat during the day, or to more or less keep the thermostat near constant?

I've done the former (turning it down at night) since I can remember
but, with the severely below normal temps outdoors lately, it has to run
a long time to get up to room temp during the day, which has caused me
to rethink my process.

Thanks.

Some think that because the heat loss is less as the house cools -
less temp differential means slower heat loss - turning it down makes
sense . I keep the heat up out here because I don't want to have to
repair busted pipes . Plus I heat with wood harvested from our 12 acres
which is much cheaper .
--
Snag
I appreciated foreign cultures more
when they stayed foreign ...
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.home.repair

On Tue, 3 Feb 2026 11:34:46 -0500, Harvey Sanenbum
<harvey50120@micro.net> wrote:

A couple decade old oil burner heats my home. Question: Is it more cost >effective to turn down the heat while sleeping and then increase the >thermostat during the day, or to more or less keep the thermostat near >constant?

I've done the former (turning it down at night) since I can remember
but, with the severely below normal temps outdoors lately, it has to run
a long time to get up to room temp during the day, which has caused me
to rethink my process.

Thanks.

Ours is a relatively well insulated 50 year old house in south
central Ontario heated with gas and a Tempstar 80%+ furnace. It's been
-20C here for weeks - we keep the house at about 21C during the day
and knock it down to about 17 at night. This means the upstairs
bedroom drops to about 15C overnight. The thermostat goed back to 21
at about 7AM and the bedroom is back to 18ish and the rest of the
house up to 21 by 8:30.
The furnace might run 1.5 to 2.5 hours during the turn-down period and
a total of 7.5 to 8.5 in a 24 hour period. The turndown period is
about 9 hours - say just over 30% - so during roughly 90% of the time
it runs 1/3 of the time, and during the other 30% it runs closer to 20
to 25% of the time. Not a HUGE savings - but keep in mind the "down"
time is the coldest part of the day - and often the windiest, with no
solar heat gain - so it seems to be worth it for us.
It is a 2 stage furnace and it VERY SELDOM kicks up to the high burn
-50,000 / 70,000 BTU input, 40,000/60,000 nominal output. It kicks to
high after 12 minutes on low if the temperature hasn't recovered.
I haven't put a timer or counter on the high fire recently but when
it was installed 23 years ago, with the blower set too dlow so it was
short cycling it virtually NEVER switched to high. I reset the fan
speed to get the temperature rize down where it belongs and since then
it has never short cycled and I have not heard it kick up to high fire
- but it MIGHT during morning recovery. The furnace is about 30%?
oversize - a 35/55000BTU would have been the correct furnace according
to heat-loss calculations
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.home.repair

On 2/3/2026 11:34 AM, Harvey Sanenbum wrote:

A couple decade old oil burner heats my home.-a Question: Is it more cost effective to turn down the heat while sleeping and then increase the thermostat during the day, or to more or less keep the thermostat near constant?

I've done the former (turning it down at night) since I can remember
but, with the severely below normal temps outdoors lately, it has to run
a long time to get up to room temp during the day, which has caused me
to rethink my process.

Thanks.

It depends. In most cases, you do save by turning it down, but, there
is a limit to be cost effective. A turn down of about 5 to 10 degrees
can save. A turn down of 15 degrees, there is a lot of makeup to do.

Comfort is another factor. Many of us sleep better with our body under
a cozy blanket and our head breathing the cooler air at night. In
summer, I turn the temp down with the AC and pay more to do that for the comfort of a good sleep.

You'd have to record actual run time during the sleep period to come up
with a number and insulation and outside differential come into play but
yes, you will save and probably be more comfortable.
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.home.repair

Ed P <esp@snet.n> writes:

On 2/3/2026 11:34 AM, Harvey Sanenbum wrote:

A couple decade old oil burner heats my home.-a Question: Is it more cost >> effective to turn down the heat while sleeping and then increase the
thermostat during the day, or to more or less keep the thermostat near
constant?

I've done the former (turning it down at night) since I can remember
but, with the severely below normal temps outdoors lately, it has to run
a long time to get up to room temp during the day, which has caused me
to rethink my process.

Thanks.

It depends. In most cases, you do save by turning it down, but, there
is a limit to be cost effective. A turn down of about 5 to 10 degrees
can save. A turn down of 15 degrees, there is a lot of makeup to do.

Comfort is another factor. Many of us sleep better with our body under
a cozy blanket and our head breathing the cooler air at night. In
summer, I turn the temp down with the AC and pay more to do that for the >comfort of a good sleep.

A water bed is ideal year-round. Constant 80F, cools in the summer and
warms in the winter.

--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.home.repair

On 2/3/2026 4:20 PM, Ed P wrote:

On 2/3/2026 11:34 AM, Harvey Sanenbum wrote:

A couple decade old oil burner heats my home.-a Question: Is it more
cost effective to turn down the heat while sleeping and then increase
the thermostat during the day, or to more or less keep the thermostat
near constant?

One more thing. My house in CT was built in 1978. In the 1990s I
replaced it with a new one and my oil use went down by about 40%. I
tracked it according to degree days to verify.

https://energykinetics.com/


--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.home.repair

On Tue, 03 Feb 2026 21:54:27 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
wrote:

Ed P <esp@snet.n> writes:

On 2/3/2026 11:34 AM, Harvey Sanenbum wrote:

A couple decade old oil burner heats my home.-a Question: Is it more cost >>> effective to turn down the heat while sleeping and then increase the
thermostat during the day, or to more or less keep the thermostat near
constant?

I've done the former (turning it down at night) since I can remember
but, with the severely below normal temps outdoors lately, it has to run >>> a long time to get up to room temp during the day, which has caused me
to rethink my process.

Thanks.

It depends. In most cases, you do save by turning it down, but, there
is a limit to be cost effective. A turn down of about 5 to 10 degrees
can save. A turn down of 15 degrees, there is a lot of makeup to do.

Comfort is another factor. Many of us sleep better with our body under
a cozy blanket and our head breathing the cooler air at night. In
summer, I turn the temp down with the AC and pay more to do that for the >>comfort of a good sleep.

A water bed is ideal year-round. Constant 80F, cools in the summer and >warms in the winter.

I had a water bed from 1982 to 2012 and I kept the heater set to a
constant 96, IIRC. Could have been 98, I'm not sure. Certainly no lower.

--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.home.repair

On Tue, 03 Feb 2026 23:57:03 -0600, Jim Joyce <none@none.invalid>
wrote:

On Tue, 03 Feb 2026 21:54:27 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
wrote:

Ed P <esp@snet.n> writes:

On 2/3/2026 11:34 AM, Harvey Sanenbum wrote:

A couple decade old oil burner heats my home.-a Question: Is it more cost >>>> effective to turn down the heat while sleeping and then increase the
thermostat during the day, or to more or less keep the thermostat near >>>> constant?

I've done the former (turning it down at night) since I can remember
but, with the severely below normal temps outdoors lately, it has to run >>>> a long time to get up to room temp during the day, which has caused me >>>> to rethink my process.

Thanks.

It depends. In most cases, you do save by turning it down, but, there >>>is a limit to be cost effective. A turn down of about 5 to 10 degrees >>>can save. A turn down of 15 degrees, there is a lot of makeup to do.

Comfort is another factor. Many of us sleep better with our body under >>>a cozy blanket and our head breathing the cooler air at night. In >>>summer, I turn the temp down with the AC and pay more to do that for the >>>comfort of a good sleep.

A water bed is ideal year-round. Constant 80F, cools in the summer and >>warms in the winter.

I had a water bed from 1982 to 2012 and I kept the heater set to a
constant 96, IIRC. Could have been 98, I'm not sure. Certainly no lower.

They are TERRIBLE if the power goes out - and even worse when they
spring a leak. No need to ask how I know on both counts. I will NEVER
go back to a water bed!!!!!!
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.home.repair

Clare Snyder <clare@snyder.on.ca> writes:

On Tue, 03 Feb 2026 23:57:03 -0600, Jim Joyce <none@none.invalid>
wrote:

On Tue, 03 Feb 2026 21:54:27 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) >>wrote:

Ed P <esp@snet.n> writes:

On 2/3/2026 11:34 AM, Harvey Sanenbum wrote:

A couple decade old oil burner heats my home.-a Question: Is it more cost
effective to turn down the heat while sleeping and then increase the >>>>> thermostat during the day, or to more or less keep the thermostat near >>>>> constant?

I've done the former (turning it down at night) since I can remember >>>>> but, with the severely below normal temps outdoors lately, it has to run >>>>> a long time to get up to room temp during the day, which has caused me >>>>> to rethink my process.

Thanks.

It depends. In most cases, you do save by turning it down, but, there >>>>is a limit to be cost effective. A turn down of about 5 to 10 degrees >>>>can save. A turn down of 15 degrees, there is a lot of makeup to do.

Comfort is another factor. Many of us sleep better with our body under >>>>a cozy blanket and our head breathing the cooler air at night. In >>>>summer, I turn the temp down with the AC and pay more to do that for the >>>>comfort of a good sleep.

A water bed is ideal year-round. Constant 80F, cools in the summer and >>>warms in the winter.

I had a water bed from 1982 to 2012 and I kept the heater set to a
constant 96, IIRC. Could have been 98, I'm not sure. Certainly no lower.

They are TERRIBLE if the power goes out

For power outages of less than 24-hours, there will not be an
appreciable difference in water temperature. It took at least three
days for me to even notice it (e.g. when the vacuum cleaner
accidentally knocks the heater plug out).

That is assuming the proper use of top-cover (blanket + comforter).

- and even worse when they
spring a leak.

I had a leak once. It was very slow (after all, the water
isn't under any signficant pressure with no occupant) and
was entirely contained by the liner.

No need to ask how I know on both counts. I will NEVER
go back to a water bed!!!!!!

Your choice. I've had mine for four decades now (on third
mattress).

--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.home.repair

Scott Lurndal wrote:

Clare Snyder <clare@snyder.on.ca> writes:

On Tue, 03 Feb 2026 23:57:03 -0600, Jim Joyce <none@none.invalid>
wrote:

On Tue, 03 Feb 2026 21:54:27 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
wrote:

Ed P <esp@snet.n> writes:

On 2/3/2026 11:34 AM, Harvey Sanenbum wrote:

A couple decade old oil burner heats my home.|e-a Question: Is it more cost
effective to turn down the heat while sleeping and then increase the >>>>>> thermostat during the day, or to more or less keep the thermostat near >>>>>> constant?

I've done the former (turning it down at night) since I can remember >>>>>> but, with the severely below normal temps outdoors lately, it has to run >>>>>> a long time to get up to room temp during the day, which has caused me >>>>>> to rethink my process.

Thanks.

It depends. In most cases, you do save by turning it down, but, there >>>>> is a limit to be cost effective. A turn down of about 5 to 10 degrees >>>>> can save. A turn down of 15 degrees, there is a lot of makeup to do. >>>>>
Comfort is another factor. Many of us sleep better with our body under >>>>> a cozy blanket and our head breathing the cooler air at night. In
summer, I turn the temp down with the AC and pay more to do that for the >>>>> comfort of a good sleep.

A water bed is ideal year-round. Constant 80F, cools in the summer and >>>> warms in the winter.

I had a water bed from 1982 to 2012 and I kept the heater set to a
constant 96, IIRC. Could have been 98, I'm not sure. Certainly no lower.

They are TERRIBLE if the power goes out

For power outages of less than 24-hours, there will not be an
appreciable difference in water temperature. It took at least three
days for me to even notice it (e.g. when the vacuum cleaner
accidentally knocks the heater plug out).

That is assuming the proper use of top-cover (blanket + comforter).

Hafta have a generator for the well, water heater, refrigerators, freezer, starlink dish, router, computers and gas furnace...might as well
include the waterbed heater.
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.home.repair

On Wed, 04 Feb 2026 12:27:24 -0500, Clare Snyder <clare@snyder.on.ca>
wrote:

On Tue, 03 Feb 2026 23:57:03 -0600, Jim Joyce <none@none.invalid>
wrote:

On Tue, 03 Feb 2026 21:54:27 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) >>wrote:

Ed P <esp@snet.n> writes:

On 2/3/2026 11:34 AM, Harvey Sanenbum wrote:

A couple decade old oil burner heats my home.-a Question: Is it more cost
effective to turn down the heat while sleeping and then increase the >>>>> thermostat during the day, or to more or less keep the thermostat near >>>>> constant?

I've done the former (turning it down at night) since I can remember >>>>> but, with the severely below normal temps outdoors lately, it has to run >>>>> a long time to get up to room temp during the day, which has caused me >>>>> to rethink my process.

Thanks.

It depends. In most cases, you do save by turning it down, but, there >>>>is a limit to be cost effective. A turn down of about 5 to 10 degrees >>>>can save. A turn down of 15 degrees, there is a lot of makeup to do.

Comfort is another factor. Many of us sleep better with our body under >>>>a cozy blanket and our head breathing the cooler air at night. In >>>>summer, I turn the temp down with the AC and pay more to do that for the >>>>comfort of a good sleep.

A water bed is ideal year-round. Constant 80F, cools in the summer and >>>warms in the winter.

I had a water bed from 1982 to 2012 and I kept the heater set to a
constant 96, IIRC. Could have been 98, I'm not sure. Certainly no lower.

They are TERRIBLE if the power goes out - and even worse when they
spring a leak. No need to ask how I know on both counts. I will NEVER
go back to a water bed!!!!!!

I'm done, as well. Mine never sprung a leak, but for me, it was a
novelty that hung around far longer than it had a right to.

--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2