knock
Bluelighter
it makes no difference to your energy consumption if you have just one or 2 radiators on, or every radiator in the house on.
Yes that's bollocks.
I dont think he had a fucking clue and i should have reported the incomptent twat. Anyway can any one confirm what appears to be common sense, if hot water doesnt have to travel round a massive circuit, and just has to keep 2 radiators warm its bound to use less energy ? I'll heat upstairs with a wood burning fire. Ive given up trying to get a job now until after the new year, so i just want to economise as much as possible in the meantime, and hopefully by next year I'll start regaining some of my natural energy that opis seemed to have "down regulated."
It's not so much how many radiators it's keeping warm but the transfer of energy from the radiators to rooms they are in.
I've not studied physics to an advanced level so I'm not sure on the details but, imagine all your rooms were perfectly insulated, i.e. they lost no heat to other rooms or to the outside. Then having a radiator switched off in one one room would save 100% of the energy it was costing to heat that room.
You don't live in a house with perfect heat insulation. Some heat will be lost from the downstairs rooms to the upstairs rooms through the ceiling. But the ceiling/floor will provide some insulation, so your position is not 100% like the perfectly insulated rooms situation, but it's closer to it than if you lived in a house with no divisions between the room, in which case what the engineer said might make a bit more sense.
Does that make sense?