Air conditioners are not the best for the planet long term, but Europeans may need to care a bit more about themselves in the short term and start installing more of them.
And (multi-)split wall mounted ACs are among the most efficient heat pumps as well with SCOPs above 4.5. It’s frustratingly little-known or talked about (in central Europe anyway), because these devices would also be a much cheaper and more efficient heat-pump upgrade for older buildings that don’t have low temp supply-water heating and would normally need to be completely gutted to install floor heating or large radiators.
While being the cheapest, AC is also the type of heating with the least amount of comfort, while the most expensive solution, underfloor or wall heating is the best comfort. Radiant heat is much less intrusive than blowing air around violently.
That being said I think it also has its perks like the forced convection heats up a cold room much quicker and in a bathroom it assists drying surfaces or clothing on a drying rack (to stick with European customs). Meanwhile floor heating is extremely slow with some annoying side effects like it basically doesn’t react to noon sun shining into a room and heating it up or stuff like that.
But I’m not going to argue that comfort wise floor heating is far superior.
I agree. One thing I’d like to add: There are also low thermal mass floor heating systems available nowadays (usually dry, built on top of a layer of Insulation). These aren’t that slow to react. But of course, these bring not only advantages but also drawbacks.
The technology behind them works exactly the same, only that usually the direction of heat transport is reversed. So at least the “cleaner” part depends largely on the chemicals used, not whether it’s an AC unit or a central heat pump.
Aren’t heat pumps a cleaner, better alternative to traditional AC?
Heat pumps ARE AC. Also your fridge.
And (multi-)split wall mounted ACs are among the most efficient heat pumps as well with SCOPs above 4.5. It’s frustratingly little-known or talked about (in central Europe anyway), because these devices would also be a much cheaper and more efficient heat-pump upgrade for older buildings that don’t have low temp supply-water heating and would normally need to be completely gutted to install floor heating or large radiators.
While being the cheapest, AC is also the type of heating with the least amount of comfort, while the most expensive solution, underfloor or wall heating is the best comfort. Radiant heat is much less intrusive than blowing air around violently.
That being said I think it also has its perks like the forced convection heats up a cold room much quicker and in a bathroom it assists drying surfaces or clothing on a drying rack (to stick with European customs). Meanwhile floor heating is extremely slow with some annoying side effects like it basically doesn’t react to noon sun shining into a room and heating it up or stuff like that.
But I’m not going to argue that comfort wise floor heating is far superior.
I agree. One thing I’d like to add: There are also low thermal mass floor heating systems available nowadays (usually dry, built on top of a layer of Insulation). These aren’t that slow to react. But of course, these bring not only advantages but also drawbacks.
Air Heat pumps are AC.
There are different types which uses earth or water body heat and are even more efficient but expensive.
Technology wise they are AC though
Yes. And many homes in Europe have them. US term for them are split AC systems.
The technology behind them works exactly the same, only that usually the direction of heat transport is reversed. So at least the “cleaner” part depends largely on the chemicals used, not whether it’s an AC unit or a central heat pump.