JIGSAW INFRARED - Heats like the sun, cares for the planet | Subscribe to Fully Charged PLUS 

Interesting Kevin. Whereabouts on the island are you. I’ve long argued that air source isn’t suitable in bits of Ireland due to the moisture laden air.

@@hughmarcus1 We are in Schull - looks like certain brands of air source are much better at handling the salty sea air/mist but still require routine maintenance to eyeball how things are faring as they age. For us, the massive expense of a2w did not make sense, and the complicated interfaces and such seemed like a disaster if I had to leave home and the wife was here by herself...we are originally from Texas and have spent the last year researching heating systems here, and it's so complicated! I do like mini-split systems, had them in the states and they worked great (cooling in the summer and heating in the winter). But we are going to try IR panels first, then if need be we would install a few mini-split systems in the rooms we feel need more.

There is a difference between an air heating system, what an heat pump would be usually and a radiating heating system. A radiating system can be much more localised and other surfaces that absob the radiation wil also itself start radiating. And with radiated heat the temperature of the air can be kept substantially lower because the radiation feels a lot warmer. Like how sitting next to a water radiator or an open fire makes you feel the heat comming off it even if the surrounding air is colder.

Screwfix currently have 1kw ones I stock for £12.99 The looks may not look the best, but are as efficient and you can decide if you like the heat, and the leccy bills before spending £000s.

IR is more useful for supplementally heating people, so that the room's temp can lowered. So it possible to just buy one IR heater and experiment with it to see how effective it can be for "you", while your still using your old gas boiler. But also consider a radiator based Heat Pump (which has tax advantages too) when it time to replace the boiler. Since it will be far more efficient for heating "rooms". HP vs IR heating, have different pros and cons. Good luck....

The inherent inefficiency of resistive heating will forever gnaw at you. Don't do it.

look a YT wannabe expert and his 2 pence of input ;)

Be careful Daniel... last time I looked at my bill gas was 1/6 th the price of electricity per kw/h. If you don't need a lot of heat they could work for sure, but if you are like most of us in the UK and use a lot of heating in the winter you'll need to look elsewhere I fear...

That study is being done. However, a lot of the population cannot have heat pumps. Infrared fairs very well against other forms of electric heating, 50% quicker and 50% cheaper. This was a 800watt panel against a 2 kilowatt convection heater.

@@glennbillington4879 OK. Perhaps a more though comparison after your study plus where to get them. I am in London. Do that I will email it to my energy company Ecotricity.

This must be the key question. It's going to be difficult to answer because it depends on the use case specifics. It would be good to see some use cases in details.

The only cost comparison that matters is getting a quote for installation with a proposed design for each system (or mix of systems) that you want to consider. Any heating and cooling technology can be applied through design effort in many different ways to a given house. There is no study that gives you “the answer” for your house. For my house IR is not effective relative to heat pump except in the bathrooms - that’s not in any study either. Find a quality designer and installers and make a plan.

If you have an EV, you are probably on a time of use tariff. Octupus Go is close to 40p peak, but 8p off peak - god knows what the peak rate is going to be next year. The elephant in the room with any electric heating is the cost to run at peak rate. A normal house is already using 10-12kWh per day and this system will add an estimated 4kwh (assuming 1hour of usage of 4x1000W panels) - this is my guesses I could be incorrect. Most electric heating really does need solar plus battery - a common battery size now would be 8kWh and in the winter you might be lucky to generate 4kWh per day. The other bottleneck could be the inverter. If you have all the panels on at the same time, the inverter might not handle it - if the oven is on too, then you really start paying!

Hi, we can heat any space and have many case studies on commercial buildings, churches and dental surgeries.

he gave a good example, churches where you absolutely aren't trying to heat up the building.

Your opinion is noted and you have obviously bought the cheaper version or seen the cheap imports into the UK. It's like buying a car, you get what you pay for. Th recent testing and University studies are proving that infrared is quicker and half the cost to run than other forms of electric heating. Have you seen the studies?

For now.

A heat pump would cost a little bit more but you'd probably save the difference in a couple of years. Trouble with great pumps is they are a complicated machine whereas this system should be fit and forget.

Heat pump COP is not all it’s claimed to be. The COP figures do not come from real life testing and the COP is often closer to 1:1 An independent study - commissioned by BEIS but written by Cambridge Architectural Research - investigated cost-optimal ways to install electric heating, including infra-red heating, and energy efficiency measures across a 12 housing archetypes, representing 90% of Britain’s 28 million homes. The study found that: • The total lifetime costs (capital + operating) of infrared heating were found to be competitive, although not cost-optimal in some housing types. • There were only small differences in costs over 15 years between low- or high-temperature heat pumps, air-to-air heat pumps, infrared or storage radiators. • Assuming a longer product lifespan (e.g. >20 years) for electric storage heaters and infrared heaters made heat pumps less attractive over the total period of ownership - as heat pumps were assumed to be replaced more frequently.

The panels can be situated in the more appropriate locations in any room, have the heat where you want it.

@@matthewwakeham2206 quality pumps keep save more than enough to pay for repairs and some extra. Heat pumps will get smarter too as well as include cooling feature and or replace boiler (hot tap water). What people chose may vary on their priority, long term saving - features - initial cost - planet friendly.

@@jigsaw.Infrared sorry Jigsaw, it's outrageous that you're misrepresenting the BEIS report like that - heat pumps were shown to be the most cost effective solution over 15 years and that would only increase.

Same with me needing to replace old E7 storage heaters in a small cottage, no gas. Looks ideal.

Changed my life and has helped improve our spend on fuel. It saves money because its not being wasted on heating the air.

@@glennbillington What does this 'not heating air' mean? Of course it's heating the air. It's a resistive heater embedded in ceramic. Very inefficient. There are so many better solutions.

@@OAK-808 the heat is emitted as radiation. Not convection. A tiny proportion of the heat is emitted as waste heat in convection, the vast majority heats you directly, using infrared. Heatpumps by comparison heat the room via traditional wet convection radiators. Resulting in wasted energy as the room air must be heated in order for the heat pump to transfer heat to you the individual.

We're here when you need us. We can help with all the elements you mention. Glenn

I quite like the idea of a suspended one, radiating down from the ceiling.

It depends on the installation and how effective it is. Your comparison is not the best and maybe better suited to the old days?

That is why these are bigger and use less wattage. The old ones used halgen bulbs which concentrated a huge amount of heat comming from a very small area. This sends less heat from a much larger area making it more moderate and comfertable. This would more be like sitting in the sun on a early spring day. Nice and comfertable in the sun, but chilly in the shade. That is the best way to discribe it i think.

This is the issue we encounter. Heat pumps are not appropriate in all cases. There needs to be some alternative and this is another form of heating. If you use solar and battery they are on a par but again, not always appropriate.

Agreed. It's weird than an EV show would not get it: the resistance heater in my 2016 e-Golf is _far_ less efficient than the heat pumps in... just about every new EV out there. EV people have known this since the LEAF. There's probably a place for these IR heaters but if it's efficiency we're after -- and we are! -- heat pumps are the way to go.

@@glennbillington4879 that surely isn't true. Why would having a battery and solar make a difference. Solar on its one provides electricity when it typically isn't needed for heating. Solar plus battery provides the flexibility to provide electricity when it is needed. Both heat pumps and your panels would make use of that flexibility. By heat pumps are 200-300% efficient and your panels are at most 100% efficient. I think your panels can only be more efficient to heat a small part of a large open space or to provide bursts of heat in a space that is usually unoccupied. Solar + battery is irrelevant to the question of heat pump vs IR panels it's basic physics.

You need a lot less heat with a radiator. You don't need to heat entire rooms and air temperature can be substantially lower to feel equally comfertable with radiated heat compared to a space that is just heated by air. Instead of heating a complete space continually to a higher temperature you can use a single panel to just have the heat radiate onto you where you are sitting. Over the dinner table or over the sofa or your desk etc.

​​@@xchopp resistive heaters heat air. Radiators radiate heat onto you. For a car comparison a radiating heater is more like the seat heating in your car. With that on you can keep the cabin temperature lower and be equally comfertable still. Which is what is recomended for ev's. And this is also resistive heating but is still a more efficient way to reach the exact same comfort level..

Very clever remark but is it right? And the better systems are?

@@glennbillington4879 1:1 'efficiency' where heat energy is concerned, is nowhere near good enough if we are going to have any chance of limiting the damage by the climate change fire we are fuelling with bad energy choices. We need to reduce energy consumption, firstly via better insulation, and secondly by harnessing freely available natural resources with combined Heat Pump and PV technology for example. Snake oil products accelerate global warming.

SAP should change that next year as electric is still seen as dirty. Things are changing.

storage heating would perform better than these as you're using off peak energy (lower carbon)

We've answered your points in a couple of the other comments Peter

'Not just any 800 watt heater, it's a Jigsaw 800 watt heater'. The tests from Aston university have stated that the 800 watt heater from Jigsaw is twice as quick and uses half the electricity to get a room up to temperature than convection type heaters - the comparable convection heater was a 2 kilowatt heater!

@@glennbillington4879 yeah, but is it an M&S heater?🤣 If that's true then bring it on! The (ancient) physics student in me says 800w of heat is less than 2kw of heat so cannot be faster, but my mind is open!

@Glenn Billington *crickets*

@@bernardfender5147 perhaps those tests were conducted in a typical UK property that's not so well insulated, meaning the convection heater's heat is being lost before it can warm up the furniture and walls of the property because a large % of the warmed air leaks out. Infrared on the other hand heats the walls and floor etc directly, so there's no need to go through the usual cycle: heat the cold water, pump the water, the hot water heats the air, then the air heats the things.

Yes - they sound great, but I agree - what makes them so expensive......profit? However, I'm all for heating systems that don't require the complications of a wet central heating system.

That sounds dystopian

Sounds like a fun hobby project. Camera + controllable turntable + a computer to do object detection and tracking.

All available on the website. Give us a call, we're happy to talk you through it.

Why do you say it takes so long to heat up a cold room. In comparison with other forms of heating it is much quicker. A recent study from Aston University has stated these facts. Twice as quick and half the cost.

@@glennbillington4879 sorry if I wasn’t clear. I’m not disparaging the system. I merely wanted more facts around the cost of running the system as there was little information given on that. If it heats an entire room up much quicker Thames fantastic! Electricity ain’t cheap though so how would it compare to an oil or gas fired system?

Resistive heating actually converts 100% of the energy input to heat so it's pretty good in that sense. The main issue is going to be the need for good insulation in the house or the electricity consumed will be high.

@@SardiPax All losses in electric devices are heat losses therefore the cheapest epectric radiator has the same heating efficiency as the most expensive IR panel, that is 100%. My comment was aimed to propose that we have devices with higher heat energy transfering efficiency a.k.a. heat pumps with COP's around 4-5 compared with COP of 1 in devices that use Joule losses.

@@SardiPax A heat pump is 300 to 400 percent 'efficient'. Resistive heating is 100

@@OAK-808 The pump itself yes, but you then need to transfer that heat around the house, which uses energy, and also there's the issue (if Air Source) of dealing with low external temps. I'm sure the real efficiency is still well over 100% but for most existing houses the heat pumps will still need resistive heating supplementation at times (to heat the water) further reducing overall efficiency. I'm not arguing against heat pumps, but nor am I deceived by the hype.

And what is your educated understanding of the situation and do you plan to save mankind Ja? On and on again we go. NOT EVERYONE can have heat pumps.. When will people listen? It is not suitable for millions of people in the UK and when someone finds the be all and all then we need to do our best. Your remarks are misleading and not fact based at all.

Good point Stuart but gas is not going to be implemented after 2025. Also, there is a massive number of people across the UK who cannot use gas or heatpumps and need something which is more economical than everyday storage heaters.

aren't the pipework losses, still heat into the property.

Yes the council in Leeds ripped out storage heaters and put IR heaters in as well as electric water heating. The tenants could no longer afford to heat their homes. Awful decision.

@@Rick54K Again, it depends on the control system and what heaters they installed really.

Would be good to see these with batteries, but unlikely to see this from developers and landlords

There is a total lack of journalist challenge here. I'm assuming a lack of case study because anyone ripping out a gas system and retrofitting these at present would see their bills sky rocket. These have a place when all heating is electric but while gas is 4p per kWh and electric is 20p these just don't stack up.

@@mikestrong719 I think there is a good chance that IR heaters are a very poor choice for most homes. They will only be good if you basically live in just a few rooms and you previously heated all the rooms. There is marginal difference between heating with a "standard" resistive heater and an IR panel, you probably feel the heat more quickly with an IR panel, but the "warming from the fabric of the building" will literally take exactly the same amount of energy as a traditional heater.

😁

No: it's the wrong wavelength of IR light. IR remotes operate in the near-IR, just beyond the red end of the visible region of the spectrum (i.e., ~0.7 - 1.0 µm). These panels -- and any other resistive electric heater, they are all "IR" heaters, even those old bar heaters -- all operate in the longwave part of the IR region (their website says 6 - 10 µm).

@@xchopp I think he may have been having a bit of a joke?

Passive house standard had to be adjusted when everyone went to led light and tv, all the homes were too cold!

lol :_)

@@That1ufo still can't beat a small 5kw boiler or a heat-pump.

if your heat-pump isn't outputting more heat than the electrical input its broken.

A problem with this logic is that this instantaneous heat will typically be needed when solar isn't not functioning. I think it is pretty evident that the best solution for long duration heat is a heat pump. This could be to heat water to heat air in a rerversible air con system. The fact is that for every calorie of energy taken from the grid you get 3 out from the heat pump. It must comes down to the whether you need to heat a whole space for a long time or a subset of the space for a short time.

@@matthewpieri9080 I'm thinking of getting IR panels as well as a heat pump. Im going to turn flow temperature down so that It's at its most efficient COP all the time, winter or summer. I.e. trickle charge the house with heat from the heat pump and use the IR panels in the room/s I'm in, using a sensor to switch on the panel. I'm using a 350W panel right this minute, and it's adequate. 5 minutes before I get up, I ask Alexa to switch it on. It's 0800,, and I'm already getting 1440W from solar.

I’m very much inclined to agree with you, with the possible exception of installation cost. For a ground up build or renovation underfloor, particularly with a ground source heat pump, seems a couple of steps ahead. However the infrared panels offer an opportunity to install a much better system to conventional on a room by room basis and at a fraction of the cost compared to having to rip a house apart. It’s one of those cases where the perfect shouldn’t be the enemy of the good.

@@ballagh Yes, I agree - I wasn't arguing underfloor heating was a better or cheaper option to theses panels, although in a new build it would be. i was just pointing out that underfloor heating is infra-red heating..

Surely this is the question of efficiency vs effectiveness? These IR panels are very efficient at converting expensive electric to heat/energy but then so are tradition heating elements. Whereas they are not very effective at heating spaces when compared to a gas boiler (but I don't think they claim to be a space heater). However the overall effectiveness comes down to whether you feel adequately warm or not and then how much it costs to do that when compared to other methods.

@You Tube for some. I live in Manchester, a place not renowned for a lot of sun, and my roof is East-West facing not the optimal South facing. I do have a large free standing garage that faces south, but currently has a flat roof. I have been thinking of putting a peaked roof on that and then solar.

@You Tube Definitely part of the Jigsaw!

@@robthomas7232 Aston University undertook an independent study for three different heating systems. Jigsaw Infrared was the infrared system used in testing. The Study found: IR heating system can increase the room temperature to 18 C in 10 mins which are less than the other two heating systems (2000 W and storage and convection) which take 15 and 17 min respectively. The IR heating system can heat the room temperature to 22-23 C compared to up to 18.5 C for the other two systems. The IR heating system has an efficiency 2 times higher than the 2000 W and storage and convection heating system. Therefore, the IR panel used half the energy (50% less) of the storage heater and reached room temp in almost half the time.

@You Tube we only invented a lot of things because we were the world's first industrialised nation. It was simply a case of a headstart. Be careful with British exceptionalism, it's a dangerous mythos.

Compared to heat pump system it is very inefficient. Compared to anything non electric it's cheaper but not more efficient.

Depends how much you pay for electricity. They have an 800 Watt version that will cost the price of kWh X 0.8, so if your cost is 10 cents per kWh, then it's 8 cents for an hour. Not at all cheaper than a heat pump. In fact resistive heating is well known as the most inefficient way to produce heat from electricity. But cheap to buy and convenient to install. I hate resistive heating.

I wonder if any 'cost over 10-year lifetimes' comparison studies have been conducted, due to the huge disparities between the upfront costs of heat pumps (or gas boilers) versus infrared heating. Considering infrared has a fraction of the upfront cost, and somewhat higher running costs (the difference would be minimised as these infrared panels need near-zero maintenance, no significant installation/servicing/repairs/part replacements etc typically), my guess would be that smaller households would save money over 10 years by buying infrared panels whereas larger households would save money with gas boulders and heat pumps.

We'd be pleased to take a look for you Klaus.

My infrared is great and i have the hot water sorted and works really well.

@@jigsaw.Infrared Cheers tho i see your not here in Denmark so a bit of a long walk .)

Not a bad idea

@@jigsaw.Infrared 1) Can a custom picture be printed on the IR heater, be ordered? Such as from a digital photo. Or is stock prints available? Seem like any added cost would attract higher end customers, who want greater customization options IMHO. 2) Is it available as part of an AR Mirror? Such as for dressing rooms at high end fashion shops. For example the shop just got in bathing suits, while its raining and cool that day. But the AR Mirror can show the customer in one the bathing suits on a sunny beach, while IR simulates the feeling of the sun on her skin. Or for a workout AR Mirror, for those who want be warmed for therapeutic purposes. In gym or at home. To warm their muscles right before or after a workout. Also afterwards it could still be used as an IR heater too, And the AR function could display HVAC and other data (or possibly for videos too?). Just a few random thoughts on how the tech could be used. Good Luck....

I think the OP is riffing on the fact that such devices have existed for decades! My grandparents used to have a combined heater/light in the bathroom

Aston University undertook an independent study for three different heating systems. Jigsaw Infrared was the infrared system used in testing. The Study found: IR heating system can increase the room temperature to 18 C in 10 mins which are less than the other two heating systems (2000 W and storage and convection) which take 15 and 17 min respectively. The IR heating system can heat the room temperature to 22-23 C compared to up to 18.5 C for the other two systems. The IR heating system has an efficiency 2 times higher than the 2000 W and storage and convection heating system. Therefore, the IR panel used half the energy (50% less) of the storage heater and reached room temp in almost half the time.

Don't think it will stay that way RE: expense of electricity vs. gas. It has been rumoured that the government will shortly be announcing the moving of levies from electricity (e.g. smart meter rollout costs) to gas.

@@jigsaw.Infrared How fast you can heat the room means nothing. Heat energy is heat energy and if heat pump can pump 4kJ of heat energy into isolated place with 1kJ of electric power you used 1kJ of electric energy to gain 4kJ of heat energy. If you want to have the same heating effect you will need to consume 4kJ of electric energy with IR panels. Therefore they are much less efficient.

@@jamislil2703 The heat pump is heating water to heat air. Water takes a lot of energy to heat. Water requires 4.2KJ of energy to heat 1Kg by 1ºC. Air or brick, the fabric of the building as an example, takes around 0.7KJ of energy to heat 1Kg by 1ºC. Therefore, the 4:1 ratio of a heat pump is being lost in the very energy-hungry process of heating water.

@@jigsaw.Infrared I agree but if you are heating a house for example you will need to heat everything in the house to the same temperature to have the constant temperature. If you have a thermostat with constant temperature everything is already heated to the same temperature except outer walls that cool because of their non zero heat transmittance. So heating the house is a match between a loss of heat energy provided by heat transmittance between outer walls and outside air and your ability to supplement that lost heat energy. And heat energy transfer is lossless aka. if you heat one kilo of water for one kelvin above the themperature of the surroundings and wait all the heat energy that was transferred to water will be transferred to the air and therefore heat it.

There's no magic here. It's a resistive heater in panel form

@@OAK-808 Yes I understand the principal. My feeling is this is not going to be very cost effective unless the property is well insulated but in difficult to insulate properties a directional heater could be more cost effective. I've used radiant heaters and they are very good but they require a lot of power. I wouldn't retro fit these to an existing property, rather spend £8000 on insulation and draught proofing.

That is basicly what this does. If you put a panel above where you sit, you only have to run that panel and the rest of the room does not have to be heated. Other systems depend on warming the entire space. Especially air based heaters have to heat the entire room, and to a higher temperature because you are missing the radiated heat.

No comparison. The panels are resistive heaters just like the glowing coils of yesteryear. This is a terrible way to produce heat. In fact, the worst way to produce heat from electricity.

Much cheaper to purchase an IR panel per kw and has 100% conversion of energy. Heat pumps can be 300%-400% efficient but this can drop to around 120% in a British winter.

Heat pump COP is not all it’s claimed to be. The COP figures do not come from real life testing and the COP is often closer to 1:1 An independent study - commissioned by BEIS but written by Cambridge Architectural Research - investigated cost-optimal ways to install electric heating, including infra-red heating, and energy efficiency measures across a 12 housing archetypes, representing 90% of Britain’s 28 million homes. The study found that: • The total lifetime costs (capital + operating) of infrared heating were found to be competitive, although not cost-optimal in some housing types. • There were only small differences in costs over 15 years between low- or high-temperature heat pumps, air-to-air heat pumps, infrared or storage radiators. • Assuming a longer product lifespan (e.g. >20 years) for electric storage heaters and infrared heaters made heat pumps less attractive over the total period of ownership - as heat pumps were assumed to be replaced more frequently.

@@OAK-808 And your experience and living with infrared is? Are you saying the studies in Universities conducted by educated people are wrong?

@@glennbillington4879 I inherited two of them with a tiny house. I use them to sentimentally dry towels in a bathroom. When it comes to 'studies', I don't take their results as gospel because they are not making their assessment criteria absolutely clear. I see no metric for 'comfort', but I do for speed. You know what I'm saying?

It has thin wires which get hot when electricity is put through them. Hot enough to glow and emit infrared. Like the fellow said, it's ridiculously simple.

Improving insulation first is always the most sensible option before installing any new heating system.

Have you had a quote and do you know the costing before making a comment? It would be better to have the draught proofing and insulation anyway but you still need heating.

@@glennbillington How can I have a quote on distant future energy bills? With draught proofing amd proper insulation the heating requirement is far less and you'd be running an old inefficient heating system far less if at all so it will be cheaper.

Yes Jim.

I believe they have.

They will be there and thank you for your positivity.

A reverse cycle aircon is far more efficient and can cool the room in the summer. I guess this system has uses in rooms too hard/expensive to service via RC aircon.

The infrared from the flat panels is just radiant heat, like from a central heating radiator, only at a temperature of 80 to 125 degrees C, compared with about 50 to 60 degrees C for the former. The peak wavelength is around 9 to 10 microns. Of course, you need to position the heater with respect to your bed so you don’t feel too warm. And you can feel the heat on your skin at 0.5m, when the larger panels are on full. That might be too close for sleeping. Some will allow you to reduce the panel temperature for this reason. I’m a physicist, so have some knowledge, but you can cross-check with others. The other type of infrared heater, the visible and near infrared (NIR) to short wave infrared (SWIR) types use strip or bar elements at much higher temperatures, and these are used for patios, and used to be popular in bathrooms. I suspect the shorter wavelengths from these might dry and crack your skin with prolonged exposure, so this second type is not suitable for sleeping under, and is only for occasional use. But do seek other opinions.

In bed you don't need a heater really. Just put on a blanket.

All in replies to other comments. Plenty of info on the website too.

No, they're exactly the same efficiency, but they can only heat surfaces - not air

@@jrisner6535 secondary heat is convection. So, they do both forms of heat.

@@glennbillington4879 that's inaccurate, almost no convection will be generated. Don't pretend IR can do everything, they're a specialised technology for specific situations

@@jrisner6535 Secondary heat is convection J. It's inevitable that once the infrared is absorbed then any further heat will be convection. Similar to when we sweat, heat from us is basically infrared and then the sweat on our clothes will become convection.

A fan heater doesn't radiate heat onto you. It is not the same thing. Compare it to sitting outside on a chilly day. In the shade you are cold while sitting in the sun the air temperature is the same but you still feel warm and cozy. It is more efficient because you don't need to heat all the air in a space or building and still be equally comfertable.

Hi, Larry! Um, yes. It seems to be... a stylish electric heater. Pump electricity in one end, heat up some wires, get warmth out of the other end. Er... In my experience that's always been a horribly expensive way of doing things, unless you produce all of your own entirely free electricity. And if you can generate endless power, I don't imagine you'd give a hoot🦉about running what amounts to a home full of old-school electric fires in the first place. I'm not sure I understand the benefits of what's being offered here. Electricity's expensive. Using it for heating is expensive. And? Ah, nostalgia... My late mum used to have a 'Magicoal' 2-bar electric fire. (No central heating.) She'd only ever use the heating part of it (either 1 or 2 x 1kW resistive heating elements) if she had guests; when alone she'd sit with the cat on her lap and turn on the 'glowing coal' (a 60 watt red lightbulb driving a lightweight circular aluminium propeller by convected heat to give a flickering effect). The artificial glow was some slight comfort in a freezing room, but wrapping up well was the only way to actually keep warm. Unfortunately it soon got to the stage that even running the 60 watt lightbulb was seen as an unnecessary extravagance, so she just cuddled Boops the cat, who was a tremendous source of comfort and who generated an astonishing amount of free heat over a period of 18 contented, purr-filled years. 🙂

@@EleanorPeterson Thanks for the laugh!

The sun is a radiant heater. Stand in the direct rays of the sun and you will feel warmer than if you stand in the shade. The air temperature around you will be the same but in the shade you'll not have the benefit of the radiant heating.Space heaters typically must first heat the air in the room to bring the space to a comfortable temperature. Radiant heating directly heats the occupants and the surfaces of the room without having to first heat the air. As hot air, NOT heat, but hot air rises, when using space heaters the temperature in a room is stratified with the air at the ceiling level being the hottest. As we are standing or sitting in the middle or lower thirds of the room we have to essentially overheat the air at the ceiling level till we are comfortable down at occupancy level. Heating all that volume of air to keep a person warm is less efficient than heating the person directly. Our bodies radiate heat to any surface around that is colder than we are and if we feel cold it is because we are radiating more heat than our body is producing at that moment. If you walk down the freezer foods section in a store you will probably feel cold, but if you compare the air temperature in the freezer foods aisle with the air temperature in the rest of the store you will probably find that there is little difference between the readings. None the less the freezer foods area feels colder because, again, we are radiating our body heat to the cold surfaces of the freezer displays. In houses that have radiant heating typically residents are comfortable at a lower air temperature than in houses with hot air heating. Hot air heating may be in the form of forced hot air, electric space heaters, hot water base boards, hot water radiators or fan forced convectors but primarily they all rely on heating the space through convection of hot air. There is a small radiant component to each of these systems which increases with the surface area of the emitter. For example a large standing cast iron radiator has a lot of surface area and sitting near it will feel warmer than sitting further away from it even though the difference in air temperature between the two locations is not significant. The grill/register of a forced hot air heating system has almost no surface area to radiate heat and so will not provide noticeable difference in comfort. I think it is universally accepted by those who have experienced it, that radiant heating provides the greatest levels of comfort. Radiant heating usually uses hot water flowing through tubing embedded in the floors walls or ceiling but for small areas such as bathroom floors may use electric resistance cable embedded in the floor. Electric radiant panels using a glass surface with an incorporated electric element were sold, installed and enjoyed by some in the 1950's here in western Canada when electricity was cheap. The first panels here used a proprietary tempered glass patented in France and were very successful but later panels used a glass made without the proprietary glass and due to thermal cycling they eventually would shatter, exploding outwards in a shower of glass and thus ended this style of heating in this area. Electric radiant panel heaters continued to be manufactured, sometimes as cable sandwiched between sheets of drywall for use in T-Bar ceilings, sometimes as low profile unit to be surface mounted on ceiling or wall but both of these were primarily used for spot heating (above a desk or work station) but never commonly used as the heat for an entire project. In the 1980's a Scandinavian company ESWA produced a radiant panel that was a foil heating element laminated into a thin plastic film. The film panels were stapled along the edges to the rough framing of the ceiling, interconnected, then covered with a drywall/plaster finish. These radiant ceilings worked well providing comfort and efficient, clean, silent operation making those who had them very happy. Until that is the panels started to break down and fail prematurely and thus ended another era of electric radiant heating. While electric radiant heating panels were failing, hydronic heating panels were surging in popularity amongst those who could afford them and today this continues to be the premium heating system available. Using plastic tubing laid out in loops on the floor of each room then embedded and covered with a finish surface, each room or area can be individually controlled providing the economy and comfort benefits of a zoned radiant heating system. While water is used to distribute the heat, the heat source can be any or even multiple sources of energy, such as electricity or gas or wood or coal or solar or heat pump. When built as a combination system such as gas/oil/electric, the owner can switch between energy types at the flip of a switch or automatically through software, taking advantage of which ever fuel is the cheapest at a given moment. As hydronic radiant panel systems provide comfort using a relatively low water temperature of 38 to 48 degrees C, maximum, they are well suited to heat pumps allowing the heat pump to operate at low and hence more efficient output temperatures. So there you have it. Radiant heat is the most comfortable form of heating and the most economical and Hydronic Hot Water Heating is the best way to implement radiant heating because it can use any form of fuel or energy. The End. Except not The End. Hydronic Hot Water Heating is Excelent, but it is old news. It's old technology. It's had it's day, or soon will have. Why, you ask? The answer is Super Power as predicted by Tony Seba. When electricity becomes as cheap as Tony predicts (due to battery storage, solar and wind production) it will no longer make sense to invest tens of thousands of dollars to install a hydronic radiant panel system when it is much simpler, cheaper and easier to gain the same benefits using electric radiant panel systems. While historically some types electric radiant panels have not lasted others have. The simplest is electric resistance cable as is often used for heating the floor in fancy house bathrooms. It is cheap, reliable, silent when operating and unlike hot water tubing in the floor it will not start leaking if ever the house loses power and so freezes up. And as quite as hydronic systems are, there can still be some sound of water flow, pump noise, boiler or heat pump operation. So now, to sum up, finally. Lets go back to the future as seen in the 1950's and once again and for the foreseeable future, enjoy the benefits of electric radiant heating using what ever type or product is most suitable for the application. I hear that Jigsaw Infrared is doing some nice things these days.

Taking the easy option and following other people is your choice. Ever thought of making an educated decision? There are many forms of data on the internet which supports infrared, even educated University studies have demonstrated its effectiveness against other forms of heating. If you prefer to listen to ill educated sceptics then you may be missing the point Larry.

@@glennbillington4879 OK. Give me some links to the studies.

I'm not sure where this information comes from - can you share the source please?

Didn't the chap say £4k for an entire house? Although everyday running cost wasn't mentioned...

What heaters are you using in your commercial property. Panel heaters or the high power type? Are they installed with efficiency in mind? Would need to know more before we could reply.

All available on the website. Give us a call, we're happy to talk you through it.

@@jigsaw.Infrared hi, Give some examples, eg 3 bedroom house, 2 bedroom bungalow, Bob

Depends on how you use it mostly. If you need your entire house heated a heatpump is more efficient. But if you spend a few hours for the tv each evening and using one of these to just make the sitting area nice and comfertable and shut down all heating in the house this is more efficient.

Spot on Antony, it's great to see a positive response from someone who knows what they are talking about.

In the UK, the government has a 23% tax on electricity (+VAT) for domestic customers, whilst gas only has 1.9%. That was about right when we burnt coal and oil to make electricity, but now the pollution caused to generate electricity is about the same as the pollution caused to burn gas at home, so these taxes should be equal.

yes

It travels Infinitely but the heat sensation decreases a lot as you move away (if the radiation pattern is similar to a sphere)

He actually said both. That is all it is and infrared heat is a wavelength of light as both you and he mentioned

That's all it is. A coil of wire embedded in a ceramic or glass panel, or whatever panel. Pointless and very expensive to run.

Hi Derek - this is covered in replies to other comments

@@jigsaw.Infrared Those comments are hard to find and STILL there wasn't exact figures given. just something about being 1/3 the electricity use of other electric heat sources. That doesn't help me much. I wanna see real world figures and I wanna see them compared to heat pumps. Electric heat is extremely inefficient and you're doing NOTHING to convince us that you have something truly new and different

@@derekcraig3617 there are replies. There’s studies too and if you’re really interested you can source them like I did before I bought mine.

The study shows Jigsaw Infrared is twice as quick and half the cost of storage heaters. The study is being released very soon. Before you ask, it was carried out in a controlled environment at a University.

@@glennbillington4879 great but storage heaters are renowned by being very expensive. they need a comparison with gas if they want people to switch..

@@gazlives That is coming but not everyone has gas. There are hundreds of thousands of people who need to use electric. Add to that, a great number of people are adding solar and battery so they won't be reliant on the grid or the gas board.

@@glennbillington4879 that a good point it can persuade those on electric already. I'd like to be comparable with gas, esp. in uk with so many on gas.

Spread sheets needed!

Well, the issue there isn't the electric heater, it's the fact that the UK still has too much fossil fuel generation. But that's changing, just like it is in most places, and just like EVs, as the grid gets cleaner, so does your heating, but a gas boiler is always going to pollute the same, or worse as it ages, plus you run the risk of dying from CO poisoning and a shortened lifespan from breathing particulates. Getting rid of a gas heater is a no-brainer, really. In Australia, the most popular heating is now reverse cycle air con, there are some really efficient units, the two best probably being Daikin and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (not Mitsubishi Electric, which are the cheaper, crappier brand). Even at sub-zero outdoor temps they can have pretty good CoPs.

@@ledsalesoz electric is too expensive compared to gas, plus the UK has had to fire up coal power stations. The UK grid can only just cope at the moment, without chucking millions of battery cars and electric heating at it. And that has nothing to do with the current situation is been like that for years.

It should be and there are companies making headways i believe.

I'm with you and Larry Phenis on this. I just don't get it. They are just fancy electric fires. What more does it do that an old style electric fire or convection (fan or otherwise) heater doesn't? With this type of heating you can't get more heat out than the amount of electricity you put in no matter how you package it. When he claims that the infrared radiation bounces round until it is adsorbed by something in the room, exactly the same can be said of the more conventional electric heaters. On the other hand using the same amount of electricity to run a heat pump should get you around 3 times as much heat for the same running cost.

@@pjaj43 there no infrared, how the hell do there expect to it to get out it's in a enclosed box, Infrared can't pass thought metal anymore than visible light can.

@@barryrogers9862 Not strictly true. All objects, except those at absolute zero, emit (and adsorb) heat radiation (infrared) to some extent. The hotter they are, the more they emit. If you heat a "metal box" above ambient then it will be emitting more than it adsorbs. This is what you feel when you stand near it. Generating heat inside the box transfers it to the outer skin via conduction and the internal radiation from the heater being adsorbed on the inside of the box and thence, transferred by conduction to the outer surface where it is re-emitted, again in the form of infrared radiation.

@@pjaj43 All true Peter, but not direct from the element which take away it one redeeming feature to ability to direct the heat, a flat panel isn't very directional. it produces no more infrared than any other heater at the same temperature, just using buzz words to make look better than it is, at the end of the day it's just an electric heater with no eco credentials and has no place being featured on a channel such as this

@@barryrogers9862 I agree with you completely Barry. I must say that the entire spiel smacked of the snake oil salesman. He was trying to say that his very expensive electric heater was, apart from its looks, somehow better than others. I'm not convinced in the slightest. I'm surprised that Robert was taken in by it and further agree that this had no place on this channel.

The loft?

One of the issues with wet underfloor is heat up and response times. Sure if you are going to leave on a basic background heat that has some validity. How many householders are going to be happy with a basic background heat instead of actually being warm? I think the point to note is that there isn't a one size fits all heating solution. We're one part of the Jigsaw of heating solutions as is wet under floor heating.

Is this something you have ever tried? Your comments are more about other forms of heating and it would be good to understand your expertise?

I've never tried infrared but have carried out a whole house retrofit with slab/insulation/wet underfloor/screed/porcelain tiles (with aluminium triple glazing, MVHR and external wall insulation) and can't imagine how this could beat the low flow temp, topping up the building as required with the underfloor set up. Temperatures are stable and it's really been a complete game changer in terms of how comfortable our (originally) leaky 1929 detached 3 bed is to live in. Just need to get rid of the gas once the cost of other electric alternatives comes down to a reasonable cost. I'm sure there are use cases for infrared but I can't imagine it could compare to the gentle top up heat, coming from below, across the whole floor area. Maybe I'm wrong, but I guess we're going to need all the solutions we can get to move towards space heating that can be powered by 100% renewably generated electricity 👍🏻 (and made in the UK, that's novel but so welcome).

@@glennbillington Not sure if you were asking me, although I'm a Building Surveyor in case you were asking me. Like I said, I've got no issue with the product as they certainly have a place, but it won't be able to 'heat the fabric' quite as simply as the interview stated.

Absolutely! Fully Charged not looking at the inefficiencies, only the shiny new sponsored content. We need to look at efficiency and lifetime cost of ownership, not just upfront cost. This is an expensive and inefficient way to heat your home. The only benefit is that you get instant heat. The other principles that they suggest in the video apply to heat pumps as well - insulate and have thermally efficient windows.

I guess that it did say "includes paid promotion". I missed that. I go to Fully Charged for trustworthy information. Now I have to wonder if what is being reviewed is simply an advert. Extremely disappointing. How on earth does this product Care for the Planet if it is simply an inefficient resistive heater.

well they are 100% efficient, the problem is the fuel costs 25p/kwh.

Heat pumps are 300 - 450% efficient.

These can still be more efficient in actual use though. These work locally and require air temperature to be substantially lower to be equally comfertable. Heat pumps need to heat entire spaces to higher temperatures to reach the same comfort level.

It heats us and the fabric in the room. Think if it like the sun. That’s why it feels really good.

@@glennbillington I thought the sun heated everything else up as well....... including the air!?

Inside the panels there's a series of coils that get hot when you pass electricity through them. It uses the resistance of the wire, (and therefore the heat the wire produces) to heat the ceramic/glass/whatever panels. Not magic. Not efficient. Yes it heats everything up. You, the air and the cup you put in front of it. It's a heater.

Turning to convection is a secondary process, once the fabric of the room is warm that will take place.

@@OAK-808 the main component of air is nitrogen/oxygen and they're transparent to IR unless it contains very high humidity. The heating of the air is secondary once the IR radiation has heated up a surface.

90°C

No, mount them on the ceiling.

Maybe not. There's obviously going to be inefficiencies in storing it in the storage heater and bringing it back out again.

@@Hyfly13 It's a resistive heater and therefore an inefficient way of producing heat. The video is an advert for a fashionable item that in the future will have very limited uses. Certainly not heating an entire house. Convenient and easy, but woefully inefficient.

Enjoy your woolly hat, seems like you will need several layers of clothes..

That's a very good value hat. My warm hat cost 35 quid! (It is a really nice posh gore windstopper hat which is so good it's almost worth the ridiculous price).

Really Vikash? Obviously you do not understand the product and it may help you to learn a little more? There are plenty of studies to read and a recent one from Aston University would make you understand more. Yes, heat pumps work but we're not competing with them. Heat pumps do a job in areas where there is space to install and the budget is high. Infrared heaters are designed for use in any property as long as it is professionally specified and the control system is correctly operated.

@@glennbillington4879 you are only focusing on cost of install. There is a bigger cost of ownership. Electricity is expansive. Putting people into fuel poverty because the cost of install is cheaper is not cool.

@@v_0 That is a disgusting comment to make and you should remove it immediately. Your ignorance of the subject matter is now obvious to everyone.

You don't need to heat the air or the rest of the room with these. These just radiate heat onto you where you are sitting. Shut down heating in the house and just turn on a single panel over the couch where you are watching tv or a movie and be just as comfertable. That is the idea of these things. If you want to heat entire spaces or buildings heatpumps are obviously more efficient.

It is not the same though. You do not use these to heat entire rooms. You use these to be comfertable where you sit and leave all other heating in the house off. Air temperature can be substantially lower in the room and this feels just as comfertable. Like sitting in the sun on a chilly day. You feel nice and warm even though the air temperature is rather low.

All direct electric heating has perfect 100% efficiency. That's easy. However heat pumps have 200 to 500% efficiency. 'Efficiency' is probably not the right way to think about heating. What actually matters is emissions, energy use and cost.

@@xxwookey I think they were comparing energy use of heat pumps to standard hvac.

I truly wish that were true. Electrical heating is a solution, though electric heat pumps are almost certainly more efficient than radiating panels.

Taking care of heat loss is the first step. Passive solar needs to be made more of, agreed. There are many pieces to the jigsaw.

Great feedback John.

The cost of heating our home halved as we previously had storage heaters. Isn’t installing the mats a totally different method? It’s more expensive than panels I’m led to believe. Have you price Jigsaws panels to compare the cost difference?

@@glennbillington The principle of the system we use is identical to the one used in panels, the main difference being that the infrared mat is placed directly under the flooring and not integrated into an aluminium panel. The mats could also be used on a ceiling or a wall. An advantage of mat over a panel is a more even heat distribution in a room. On the other hand if there is any breakdown or damage to the circuit you have to replace the entire floor. With a panel any breakdowns are much easier to fix.

But some of us don't have gas.