I've been benefitting from this forum for years. Because we live in the NE, for all that time, I've been draining down the water level to below the return jets, blowing out the lines, etc. In other words, winterizing by the book.
Today, I covered our pool (mesh cover) to avoid the coming leaves. The bottom was clean and the water clear. While I was working I began to wonder: "do I need to drain the pool if I keep the heat pump set for 42 degrees F and leave the pump to circulate water?" I calculated that I would spend $250 on electricity to keep the pump running over the winter. That is far less than I spend on replenishing salt, calcium, etc. at the start of every season (I have a SWG). I have no idea whether the heat pump would need to be run or not (e.g., would the average water temp of a 35K gallon pool fall below 42F?). BTW, we have a generator that could supply power if we do have a power failure.
Is this experiment nuts?
I've seen this question addressed for lower latitude owners, but not for someone as far north as us (apologies if I missed something).
The average temperature in Westchester NY is below freezing only in January, but we can get cold spells in the teens. I found I can set our heat pump to 42 F (it's lowest setting) so it should be able to keep the water warm enough to not freeze up, right?
The positives that I could imagine would be:
1. Cleaner water in the Spring.
2. Less need to add chemicals to rebalance in the Spring.
3. Basically, an easier opening.
The problems I could foresee:
1. Precipitation would require me to pump out water periodically and negate savings of chemicals
2. Heat pump might need to run more than I anticipate.
3. Unnecessary wear and tear on equipment.
So I return to my question: Is this idea nuts? misguided? uninformed?
Thanks for any feedback.
Today, I covered our pool (mesh cover) to avoid the coming leaves. The bottom was clean and the water clear. While I was working I began to wonder: "do I need to drain the pool if I keep the heat pump set for 42 degrees F and leave the pump to circulate water?" I calculated that I would spend $250 on electricity to keep the pump running over the winter. That is far less than I spend on replenishing salt, calcium, etc. at the start of every season (I have a SWG). I have no idea whether the heat pump would need to be run or not (e.g., would the average water temp of a 35K gallon pool fall below 42F?). BTW, we have a generator that could supply power if we do have a power failure.
Is this experiment nuts?
I've seen this question addressed for lower latitude owners, but not for someone as far north as us (apologies if I missed something).
The average temperature in Westchester NY is below freezing only in January, but we can get cold spells in the teens. I found I can set our heat pump to 42 F (it's lowest setting) so it should be able to keep the water warm enough to not freeze up, right?
The positives that I could imagine would be:
1. Cleaner water in the Spring.
2. Less need to add chemicals to rebalance in the Spring.
3. Basically, an easier opening.
The problems I could foresee:
1. Precipitation would require me to pump out water periodically and negate savings of chemicals
2. Heat pump might need to run more than I anticipate.
3. Unnecessary wear and tear on equipment.
So I return to my question: Is this idea nuts? misguided? uninformed?
Thanks for any feedback.