Lets do a poll. Best heat source for your house. 4 choices.

[blackpowder]

Looks like we've all been had by a bot pulling up a year old thread again.
Again, for me nat gas is like Carnation Milk. You know the rest lol.

[WiltonRanch]

Looks like we've all been had by a bot pulling up a year old thread again.
Again, for me nat gas is like Carnation Milk. You know the rest lol.

We’ve been had.

[chuckChuck]

Best source of heat is a super insulated south facing passive solar house with a large heat sink.

On the prairies where there is still quite a lot of sun in the winter, the sun can provide a significant amount of energy especially in the colder fall and spring months.

Super insulated with heat recovery systems, high efficiency furnaces and hot water heaters along with high efficiency appliances and a house uses a lot less energy.

Add in a PV solar system and you get a net zero house which produces as much or more energy than it uses on an annual basis. Several of these net zero houses have been built in Calgary and Edmonton.

[Integrity_Farmer]

What would every one of you figure is the most environmentally friendly heating source for your home.

1. Wood. Ah, the smell, the heat, the warmth. Yes, the tree falls in the woods and is cut up and burnt and a new tree grows to replace it. Ah, the circle of life.

2. Natural Gas. Clean efficient warmth and never in shortage for supply plus cheap. It is actually an environmentally friendly way to heat as before the gas was burnt off now it has a use. The best bet for your money and oh so nice on -50 days.

3. Electric heat, you buy a blanket and hope tomorrow is a warmer day. You hate to open your electric bill because it's so high you may as well smoke Trudeau's legal pot and be at one with your bill. All joking aside it does heat small areas and works to keep warm.

4. Geo-Thermal. Shoot the pipe in the ground go deep enough and the ground will heat your home. Makes sense has a place but on really cold ****ing nights you need extra.

So what do each of you like, what's cheap, what do we control the cost on, remembering we live in the semi artic.

4. Geo-Thermal.

Geo thermal is proven we have it in our house it cost around $20,000.00 to put in a new build compared to about $10,000.00 for electricity. It cuts our hydro bill by about 65% plus it heats our water and provides air conditioning in summer. With our system the additional power (electricity) never comes on unless you leave the door open for a long time on a cold day.

[Integrity_Farmer]

Best source of heat is a super insulated south facing passive solar house with a large heat sink.

On the prairies where there is still quite a lot of sun in the winter, the sun can provide a significant amount of energy especially in the colder fall and spring months.

Super insulated with heat recovery systems, high efficiency furnaces and hot water heaters along with high efficiency appliances and a house uses a lot less energy.

Add in a PV solar system and you get a net zero house which produces as much or more energy than it uses on an annual basis. Several of these net zero houses have been built in Calgary and Edmonton.

Home heating--- For efficiency, longevity, lack of maintenance and capital cost ground sourced geothermal is hard to beat.
In addition to ground source geothermal we also also have a heat recovery ventilator HRV.

My son is looking for a house in Winnipeg and the only choice for heat is natural gas (very sad). In terms of C02 emissions fracked gas is worse than burning coal.

Here is a model of a super insulated house in Winnipeg built by freinds of mine

This house is heated on 2 hair dryers' worth of energy in winter — and now it's easier to have a home like it
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/energy-efficient-home-construction-1.4787750

[Taiga]

My son is looking for a house in Winnipeg and the only choice for heat is natural gas (very sad). In terms of C02 emissions fracked gas is worse than burning coal.

Hi. You lost me on that, can you elaborate on the fracked gas claim please?

[Integrity_Farmer]

Hi. You lost me on that, can you elaborate on the fracked gas claim please?

Fracking and emissions Proponents of natural gas have said that natural gas is a climate-friendly fossil fuel because it produces less GHG emissions when burned compared to other fossil fuels.
According to the Natural Gas Supply Association, natural gas produces half the CO2 emissions of coal.
1 But that doesn’t make fracking clean! The lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions – that is the combined emissions associated with extraction, combustion, and methane and CO2 releases – means that fracked gas can be as dirty as coal.
2.Fracking releases large amounts of natural gas – which consists of both CO2 and methane – directly into the atmosphere. In fact, fracking wells leak 40 to 60 per cent more methane than conventional natural gas wells.
3 This happens when water is forced down into a fracking well in order to fracture the rock formations. Methane flows up the well and is released into the atmosphere before it can be captured.
4 The leaked methane is called “fugitive methane” and has been detected using infrared videos. It is identified as different from naturally occurring methane.
5 Methane in particular is a very powerful greenhouse gas. It can trap 20 to 25 times more heat in the atmosphere than CO2 .
Two Cornell scientists who have been studying fracking in the U.S. estimate that in the next 20 years methane will make up 44 per cent of the U.S.’s GHG emissions. Along with contributing to global warming pollution, methane leaks kill plants and trees, contribute to ozone formation, and causes natural gas explosions, which have resulted in an average of 17 deaths and 68 injuries per year in the United States alone.

https://canadians.org/sites/default/files/publications/fracking-climate-change.pdf

Fracked gas far worse for environment than coal, say scientists
https://www.independent.ie/news/environment/fracked-gas-far-worse-for-environment-than-coal-say-scientists-38580507.html

Numerous sceintific articles point out the problems with fracked gas

[Taiga]

Sorry but that is all absolute garbage. Don’t have time to respond properly at this. The only difference between ‘fracked’ natural gas and conventional natural gas is the 12hrs of diesel burned by the pump crew. Methane ‘released before it can be captured’ has nothing to do with ‘fracked gas’, just poor facility design and equipment. Your connection with fracking is nonsensical.

[Integrity_Farmer]

Sorry but that is all absolute garbage. Your connection with fracking is nonsensical.

Please don't read or take the time to respond or inform yourself.
You feel you know more than the scientists from Cornell. All I can say is good for you.

Here is the study for folks like me that may want to take the time to read and understand. Large amounts of methane and CO2 are released from hydrulic fracking. Methane is a harmfull greenhouse gas

https://naturaljustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/FA-12-Howarth-RichardsBayReview.pdf

[Taiga]

Please don't read or take the time to respond or inform yourself.
You feel you know more than the scientists from Cornell. All I can say is good for you.

Here is the study for folks like me that may want to take the time to read and understand. Large amounts of methane and CO2 are released from hydrulic fracking. Methane is a harmfull greenhouse gas

https://naturaljustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/FA-12-Howarth-RichardsBayReview.pdf

Sure gas leaks and liquids spill, what does that have to do with hydraulic fracturing? You obvious don’t understand what that is, it is just a well stimulation technique. It is not an open wellhead to the atmosphere.