back
1 comments
a) Solar is not applicable to the Northern Europe. It does not generate heat when it's needed the most (winter).

b) Heat pump (installation, retrofitting existing heat distribution, if at all possible; largest problems might arise with wall mounted radiators since they much larger temperatures to operate) is very costly. Maintenance and running costs not so much.

c) Electricity prices even at the current tarriffs are not cheaper than CNG. This comes from data comparing data on similar volume and insulation buildings using heatpump and CNG heating. That will most likely change in favour of electricity, though its generation from natural gas is really popular around here. d) To change the type of heating from CNG to something else en-masse would require extreme financial, labor and supply expenses.

I'm pro giving up on the Russian CGN because I do not depend on it and I can offset price hikes. But assuming that would not be without major economic and other consequences is a nonsense.

Edit: formatting and a typo.

In in Northern Europe and (c) is not true for new housing stock.

I'm building a house and ran the calculations (two years ago, before gas got expensive) for various forms of heating, and solar PV + heat pump came out the cheapest. We have net-metering but still need to pay "transmission fees" (7c/kWh) for electricity we later consume.

I also considered just using gas for heating in the winter, but the connection fees (installation and ongoing network fees) came out to be much more than the cost of the gas we would actually use.