Outdoor heating, are you for or against?

reply to post by Extralien


The article you are referring to is discussing infrared heat. By principal, infrared heaters heat objects not the air. Yes, some heat is lost to convection. But the objects around the heater actual heat up and retain the heat. Many outdoor heaters are infrared in nature.

You can't inflate a hot air balloon with infrared heat.

en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by jibeho

I don't agree with your logic, it is faulty.
Indoors in an insulated environment those objects that are heated by the quartz elements by infrared heat will most likely give off that heat to the surrounding air to help heat the indoor air.

Outdoors that heat is lost and not stored in the surrounding air.
It's still a waste any way you slice it.
Don't listen to the sales pitch as sensible.

It's like filling a bucket with water and it has a big hole in the bottom, the sides of the bucket get wet, but it holds no water.

Like your legitimization of outdoor heating.

You must constantly pour water in it to keep it full, a hole free (or small holed bucket) bucket stays full longer and requires less input.

reply to post by Toadmund


Infrared is the transfer of heat to an object it does not heat the air. The object heats up and retains heat and yes the object will continue lose heat as well. When you turn off the heater the objects cool. Simple science. Infrared heaters are used in car repair garages, barns, and outdoor heaters. Obviously, the heaters are more efficient when used indoors.

Originally posted by jibeho
reply to post by Toadmund

 

Infrared is the transfer of heat to an object it does not heat the air. The object heats up and retains heat and yes the object will continue lose heat as well.

You are contradicting yourself here, first you say the objects retain the heat, then it will continue to lose heat.

When you turn off the heater the objects cool.

Hence, the objects don't really retain this heat any better than any other source of heat.

It's just wasteful.

PS, I agree with your last sentence.

[edit on 11-11-2008 by Toadmund]

reply to post by Toadmund


Some objects have a greater thermal mass and retain heat better than others. Stone, concrete, brick are great retainers of heat. You can heat them with a constant heat source, terminate the heat, and they will continue to radiate heat.
Yes, they will slowly cool down without a regenerative heat source.

What is the point of all of this anyway? I could care less if you take away the heaters or not. Are there enough heaters in constant use around the world to make a difference? Harness your energy and focus on auto and industrial emissions.

Is there a perfect solution? NO. In order to save energy you have to produce energy. Electric cars need rechargeable batteries and thus the electricity needed to recharge them (don't forget to dispose of those batteries properly when they die). Steam powered cars need heat and fuel to generate steam. CFL lightbulbs save energy but are harmful to the environment. I could burn candles, but the combustion will probably harm my "carbon footprint" and I will have to buy carbon credits from Gore's new side business. Hydrogen... you need energy for that also.

However, the subject material is how the energy is used, is it wasted unnecesarily?
Or is it put to good use in the most energy efficient manner possible under the situation it which it is needed? Outdoor heating is disqualified here.

The key word is need. Outdoor heating is a not needed convenience, one more thing we should live without. Unless of course there was no source of an indoor heating environment.

reply to post by nerbot


I usually go outside to escape the heat from inside the building. Bars/clubs can get like saunas and sometimes I'd rather go outside and smoke in the cold.

This is completely rediculous anyways. Nothing good can come from it except to keep a homeless person warmer (bouncers will take care of that, too... so really nothing good about this at all)

Originally posted by Toadmund
However, the subject material is how the energy is used, is it wasted unnecesarily?
Or is it put to good use in the most energy efficient manner possible under the situation it which it is needed? Outdoor heating is disqualified here.

The key word is need. Outdoor heating is a not needed convenience, one more thing we should live without. Unless of course there was no source of an indoor heating environment.

I suppose I will go out and dismantle the wood burning fire pit in my backyard. Say goodbye to the joys of childhood. Smores, toasted marshmallows, ghost stories and hobo pies. The fun police is out to get them.

I could debate energy efficiency all day. I run my house with a tight and efficient wallet. Added insulation, low fluch toilets, front load washer, those damn cfl lightbulbs, new windows, new furnace, tankless hot water is next.

Patio heaters are a drop in the bucket. Focus on cars and industry first. You can start with a phone call to China. Convince people that they do not need 12 cylinder luxury cars. Convince my neighbor not to drive his 1930 Packard on Sundays because it needs lead added to the fuel and doesn't burn efficiently. Do we need these things? No. Will they ever be taken away? No.

I dont see how anyone can oppose to being warm.

And a Big argument against smoking outside is the user gets Cold.

BUT, if you dont want smoking what-so-ever at your place, then dont do it.

I think coin operated heating elements Outside, would be best.

[edit on 11-11-2008 by monkeybus]

Can I just point out...

This is an argument, on how to stay warm, yet be worried about global warming at the same time?? huh?? anyone spot the obvious mistake here?? lol

I am all for these heaters. and here is why..

Until such time as government openly displays concern about:
- Air traffic volumes
- Cleaner fuels
- Promoting (& not hiding or outlawing) free energy (which has been at their disposal for years).

Only then, will I consider that global warming might partly be manmade and be a reversable/containable problem!

Common!

Don't get me wrong, I recycle, got rid of my car, am as earth friendly as I can be.

but I will not stand in the cold while extra runways are being built, more nuclear plants planned and promoted by a world power like Britian.

All I have seen from them thusfar, were rediculous money making tactics like taxes, fines etc.etc.

Talk about taking atvantage of a situation..jees

The same government, thats telling you to stand out in the cold and catch your death, are planning, building and expanding the biggest culprits to this so-called global warming problem??

One huge hahaha from me and my SMALL outdoor heater!

has anyone ever considered. a Coat? you know; FABRIC!

If its cold, or there is Dark clouds in the sky, take an extra layer with you.

If you dont want to carry it around inside, then there is usually somewhere to hang your jacket/some one to give it to.......Depending on where you visit that is, and in that case;

RENTAL JACKETS!!

These have been around for many many years. Nothing new.

I dont mind them. I actually like them, as I love to be outside eating and drinking....and in many states that is nearly impossible during the fall/winter time.

Originally posted by Toadmund
However, the subject material is how the energy is used, is it wasted unnecesarily?
Or is it put to good use in the most energy efficient manner possible under the situation it which it is needed? Outdoor heating is disqualified here.

The key word is need. Outdoor heating is a not needed convenience, one more thing we should live without. Unless of course there was no source of an indoor heating environment.

As you can see from replies in this thread, many people like the things, since they let them eat outdoors wearing room temperature attire when it's colder. Restaurants know this, and build the things. Now I've only had the run of the west coast, but they aren't very common over here, so I'd go out on a limb and say that the sum total of those LPG space heaters could have their carbon footprint offset by everyone turning their air conditioning thermostat up a degree.

Like most things in modern society, it isn't about being maximally efficient, it's about being profitable. Though many people acknowledge environmental concerns, they aren't willing to change their lifestyle until they can't afford to continue it.

They have them all around here, and they don't bother me. They are pretty nice to walk by on a cold evening.

And btw, 90% of my trash is recycled(AKA, everything they will take), I try to buy things that come in recyclable containers, I don't drive a SUV(I don't drive at all anymore), and even if I did, I wouldn't park in a handicap spot or do any of those other strawmen arguments.

I'd be willing to bet that everyone here has wasted more energy and caused more pollution doing things they didn't really need to do. Just seems to me people are being hypocritical against the things they don't really use themselves.

Global warming is also a hoax. But besides that, people have no right to pollute other peoples environment. I think there are bigger things to worry about.