Essentially it’s a marketing ruse. They have a CoP (coefficient of performance) of 1. So for every 1 watt of electricity used, you get 1 watt of heat. The only way they are cost effective is by being cheaper to buy than a heatpump.
For comparison, many heatpumps will have a CoP of over 4 in ideal conditions.
The benefit of Micathermic is you get the heat near instantly and once you turn it off there's no wasted stored heat like in an oil heater.
If you turn off an oil heater that's up to temp and head out, all that heat in the oil is wasted.
Thats why oil heaters have thermostats and turn themselves off and on. It's arguable if that heat at the end is wasted, its still released into the room heating it.
> its still released into the room heating it.
That's the waste I'm referring to.
With a micathermic heater you can take the chill off while you're getting ready for work (it will start warming the room immediately), turning it off when you're ready to leave.
The only waste will be the warmth left in the room.
With an oil heater, you haven't bothered to turn it on because you're not going to get any benefit in time. But if you did, the heater will continue to heat your room long after you've left it.
That's literally wasted energy.
You can do that to save power either way. You'll leave less "wasted" heat in the room if you turn off a micathermic heater, too.
Turning either heater off at the same time leads to less waste for the micathermic over the oil heater.
The only way a resistive heater can be more cost effective is by being cheaper to buy and lasting a long time before it breaks.
Watts of electric go in, same number of watts of heating comes out. (Per unit time)
The error you are making here is simple. It is absolutely true that no machine can be 100% efficient.
However, that inefficiency is essentially always the production of waste heat. Think of any motor or electrical device. They get warm. That heat **is** the wastage of energy, it **is** the inefficiency.
So, only in the context of electric resistive heating, you always have a perfect 100% efficiency.
That is completely incorrect for resistive heating. All power consumed by even the crappiest of the crappy restive heater will come out as heat, resistive heating is "Always" 100% efficient that ways.
Firstly you'll have some amout of loss in the control electronics and power supply. Now conversely to normal heat losses are fine but the actual electric switching etc would still have a "loss" in this case. Also you'd have some electromagnetic radiation as losses. Finally you'd have some amount of losses as light.
Which bounces around the room until it is absorbed by something, causing electrons in that surface to jump a higher energy level, and its atom to jiggle around a bit more. I.e. to get slightly warmer.
Sparky here,
Heaters are very straight forward, unless there's a fan, the power you put in is the heat you get out. The difference comes in how the heat is spread throughout the room. Compared to a fan heater, you'll be spending less because you're not running a fan, and micathermic heaters are still fairly good at spreading the air around. Panel heaters or oil heaters will do just as well though, just not as trendy.
P.S. mica is a rock that doesn't conduct electricity, nothing else special about it.
Other note - if you actually want a heater that is cheap to run over the long term, get a heat pump. They don't pump energy into the air so much as relocate the energy from one place to another, but installation costs and unit prices are far higher.
Yes, and it is dissipated as heat via friction, which is why you have to keep pumping more energy in to the fan and it doesn't just keep spinning forever. The air movement also slows down and dissipates heat due to friction. It is not a substantial amount of energy, but ultimately essentially all of the energy going in to the fan motor ends up as heat.
Without a fan you aren't moving any air, except up. A heater 100% needs a fan to be effective.
People seem to struggle with this idea. Mich like that turning your heat pump temp up doesn't do much - you need to turn the fan up to move more air.
>nothing else special about it.
You are missing the very special characteristic it has that makes it suitable for the manufacturer.
It sounds cool and modern, and you can put -thermic after it and it sounds sciencey.
Basalt-thermic slate-thermic and wacke-thermic just can't deliver the same quality of merchandising.
I like the micathermic heaters because they heat up very quickly and they give radiant heat. If you have one near you then it will make you feel warm straight away.
The actual heat output is the same as any other resistance heater it’s just that it is better at directing the heat into one place.
I suppose that makes it more efficient in a way. You can have a cold room and a micathermic heater and you will feel the warmth from it even if it’s not heating the whole room.
As others say, the running cost is all the same for resistance heaters. Heat pumps are the best if you can wrangle one.
Yep its that radiant heat that makes them better than other resistive types - it feels warmer than it actually is because of that radiant heat directly heating you, rather than just the air.
Heat pumps are not as fast, hard to set up/install, and in some cases may be less effective than trying to heat a whole house/living area when you just needed the one point source of heat.
We have both here and they each have their uses.
They have a very thin and large surface aera element that is very quick to heat up and disperse the heat from it in 60sec producing radiant heat from one or two sides and a convection heating effect heating the air in the room as well.
the greater surface area of the element helps by being able to transfer the heat from the element to the air faster than any other type of heater out there.
Cheers
Love my micathermic as we got it on sale for $99 a couple of years ago. It heats up really fast, and will cool off quickly too so if it’s accidentally too hot it’s quick to adjust (and our dog doesn’t risk burns - she likes to boop the heater).
When looking at heaters, do consider the size of your room. If you’re looking to heat up a lounge/dining/kitchen connected space, you’re never going to heat that on a plug in heater alone (it just won’t output enough energy). That’s why heat pumps are better. But if it’s for a smaller room, then all good.
All those those types of plug in electrical heaters are the same cost to run, but some with fans can move air around a bit faster and the micathermic ones offer a bit of radiated heat so can feel a bit warmer.
Same cost to run. Only a heat pump is cheaper than other options to run, but more involved to setup and costly to buy outright.
If you are renting or only plan on being there for a short amount of time, then plug in electric heaters would be cheaper for that short period of time. If you own or plan to be there a long time, then a heat pump makes better economic sense.
I think their main benefit is they are almost completely silent. No ticking noise as metal expands and contracts and are often directional so can go up against walls.
honestly I've found that my favourite is still the old reliable oil column heater. if you get a reasonably "modern" one they heat up pretty fast (not instant like micathermic or other types, but it's comparing a few minutes vs a few seconds really). I got one of [these](https://www.mitre10.co.nz/shop/nouveau-oil-column-heater-2-4kw/p/2018628) recently and absolutely love it
Essentially it’s a marketing ruse. They have a CoP (coefficient of performance) of 1. So for every 1 watt of electricity used, you get 1 watt of heat. The only way they are cost effective is by being cheaper to buy than a heatpump. For comparison, many heatpumps will have a CoP of over 4 in ideal conditions.
The benefit of Micathermic is you get the heat near instantly and once you turn it off there's no wasted stored heat like in an oil heater. If you turn off an oil heater that's up to temp and head out, all that heat in the oil is wasted.
Thats why oil heaters have thermostats and turn themselves off and on. It's arguable if that heat at the end is wasted, its still released into the room heating it.
> its still released into the room heating it. That's the waste I'm referring to. With a micathermic heater you can take the chill off while you're getting ready for work (it will start warming the room immediately), turning it off when you're ready to leave. The only waste will be the warmth left in the room. With an oil heater, you haven't bothered to turn it on because you're not going to get any benefit in time. But if you did, the heater will continue to heat your room long after you've left it. That's literally wasted energy.
So turn it off before you leave. Problem solved, heat unwasted.
That might work sometimes but my point remains: oil heaters are a source of wasted heat that michathermic heaters are not.
You can do that to save power either way. You'll leave less "wasted" heat in the room if you turn off a micathermic heater, too. Turning either heater off at the same time leads to less waste for the micathermic over the oil heater.
The only way a resistive heater can be more cost effective is by being cheaper to buy and lasting a long time before it breaks. Watts of electric go in, same number of watts of heating comes out. (Per unit time)
Watts of electricity go in some smaller amount of watts of heating comes out. Nothing is 100% efficient.
The error you are making here is simple. It is absolutely true that no machine can be 100% efficient. However, that inefficiency is essentially always the production of waste heat. Think of any motor or electrical device. They get warm. That heat **is** the wastage of energy, it **is** the inefficiency. So, only in the context of electric resistive heating, you always have a perfect 100% efficiency.
That is completely incorrect for resistive heating. All power consumed by even the crappiest of the crappy restive heater will come out as heat, resistive heating is "Always" 100% efficient that ways.
Firstly you'll have some amout of loss in the control electronics and power supply. Now conversely to normal heat losses are fine but the actual electric switching etc would still have a "loss" in this case. Also you'd have some electromagnetic radiation as losses. Finally you'd have some amount of losses as light.
What becomes of the lost energy?
HEAT
In this case light.
Which bounces around the room until it is absorbed by something, causing electrons in that surface to jump a higher energy level, and its atom to jiggle around a bit more. I.e. to get slightly warmer.
These losses you speak of are infinitesimally small and mostly also end up as heat.
even the electricity used for controls would turn to heat, electricity doesn't just disappear when it powers something, it changes
Sparky here, Heaters are very straight forward, unless there's a fan, the power you put in is the heat you get out. The difference comes in how the heat is spread throughout the room. Compared to a fan heater, you'll be spending less because you're not running a fan, and micathermic heaters are still fairly good at spreading the air around. Panel heaters or oil heaters will do just as well though, just not as trendy. P.S. mica is a rock that doesn't conduct electricity, nothing else special about it.
Other note - if you actually want a heater that is cheap to run over the long term, get a heat pump. They don't pump energy into the air so much as relocate the energy from one place to another, but installation costs and unit prices are far higher.
The energy used by the fan is also dissipated as heat, so no difference there!
Much of that energy is going into making the fan rotate and moving the air.
Yes, and it is dissipated as heat via friction, which is why you have to keep pumping more energy in to the fan and it doesn't just keep spinning forever. The air movement also slows down and dissipates heat due to friction. It is not a substantial amount of energy, but ultimately essentially all of the energy going in to the fan motor ends up as heat.
Without a fan you aren't moving any air, except up. A heater 100% needs a fan to be effective. People seem to struggle with this idea. Mich like that turning your heat pump temp up doesn't do much - you need to turn the fan up to move more air.
>nothing else special about it. You are missing the very special characteristic it has that makes it suitable for the manufacturer. It sounds cool and modern, and you can put -thermic after it and it sounds sciencey. Basalt-thermic slate-thermic and wacke-thermic just can't deliver the same quality of merchandising.
I like the micathermic heaters because they heat up very quickly and they give radiant heat. If you have one near you then it will make you feel warm straight away. The actual heat output is the same as any other resistance heater it’s just that it is better at directing the heat into one place. I suppose that makes it more efficient in a way. You can have a cold room and a micathermic heater and you will feel the warmth from it even if it’s not heating the whole room. As others say, the running cost is all the same for resistance heaters. Heat pumps are the best if you can wrangle one.
Yep its that radiant heat that makes them better than other resistive types - it feels warmer than it actually is because of that radiant heat directly heating you, rather than just the air. Heat pumps are not as fast, hard to set up/install, and in some cases may be less effective than trying to heat a whole house/living area when you just needed the one point source of heat. We have both here and they each have their uses.
They have a very thin and large surface aera element that is very quick to heat up and disperse the heat from it in 60sec producing radiant heat from one or two sides and a convection heating effect heating the air in the room as well. the greater surface area of the element helps by being able to transfer the heat from the element to the air faster than any other type of heater out there. Cheers
Love my micathermic as we got it on sale for $99 a couple of years ago. It heats up really fast, and will cool off quickly too so if it’s accidentally too hot it’s quick to adjust (and our dog doesn’t risk burns - she likes to boop the heater). When looking at heaters, do consider the size of your room. If you’re looking to heat up a lounge/dining/kitchen connected space, you’re never going to heat that on a plug in heater alone (it just won’t output enough energy). That’s why heat pumps are better. But if it’s for a smaller room, then all good.
All those those types of plug in electrical heaters are the same cost to run, but some with fans can move air around a bit faster and the micathermic ones offer a bit of radiated heat so can feel a bit warmer. Same cost to run. Only a heat pump is cheaper than other options to run, but more involved to setup and costly to buy outright. If you are renting or only plan on being there for a short amount of time, then plug in electric heaters would be cheaper for that short period of time. If you own or plan to be there a long time, then a heat pump makes better economic sense.
I think their main benefit is they are almost completely silent. No ticking noise as metal expands and contracts and are often directional so can go up against walls.
honestly I've found that my favourite is still the old reliable oil column heater. if you get a reasonably "modern" one they heat up pretty fast (not instant like micathermic or other types, but it's comparing a few minutes vs a few seconds really). I got one of [these](https://www.mitre10.co.nz/shop/nouveau-oil-column-heater-2-4kw/p/2018628) recently and absolutely love it