Hi all,
I have seen threads talking about the pro/cons of solar covers, but just wanted to get everyone's take on standard vinyl mesh covers (typically with UV protectant). I have a 20 x 45 pool with an Aquamatic automatic cover currently installed (it came with the house, which we bought 2 years ago). The cover is 7 years old and has a tear and probably should have been replaced a couple of years ago but I didn't notice the tear until recently. The cost to replace the cover is about $4400 and the new cover is only expected to last about 5 years (got quotes from all 3 local cover installers - Aquamatic, Pool Covers, Inc. and Pool Safe). Assuming some additional maintenance costs over the 5-year expected life, we are talking about $1K a year just for the cover. From a pure cost-benefit analysis, is the cover really saving me $1K a year, presumably in water savings (due to reduced evaporation), energy saving (from having to run the pool filter/heater less often), and chemicals (less UV means less break down)?
I know most pool companies that sell covers clearly state it is worth it, but I was wondering if any neutral party has actually tried to quantify the cost savings with a cover (I understand the analysis may change based on pool size, location, etc. but was hoping someone has done the analysis and reached a conclusion either way). I am a bit skeptical because the cover companies tell me to leave the cover on even during our sunny California days in the summer when I would think having the cover off and having the sun heat the pool would be better than keeping the cover on and having the cover absorb the sun, which likely is just heating the top of the pool. I do have a gas heater and use it regularly to keep my pool warm. Also, I am in the San Francisco East Bay area where summers get quite hot (lots of 90+ days), and my kids are all older, so the cover isn't really a safety thing for me.
I am kicking myself because water was apparently getting through the cover from a hidden tear in a seam and my automatic pool cover pump was pumping what turn out to be pool water off the cover (I thought it was just condensation), which probably cost me more water usage than the evaporation saving from the cover. Also, after 5 years, the cover companies told me that water can basically soak through the cover even without a tear. During the summer, I have been closing the cover every night and opening every morning, which obviously isn't ideal given the hassle. I also don't think my Polaris cleaner works as well with the cover on - the cover is designed to sit on the water, which hinders the flow of the Polaris hose, which has floaters and is intended to float on top of the water.
Any thoughts on the pros/cons of vinyl mesh covers would be appreciated before I make my purchasing decision.
Also, do people generally close the cover at night and then open it in the morning (especially during sunny summer days), or just keep the cover closed when not in use?
Thanks!
I have seen threads talking about the pro/cons of solar covers, but just wanted to get everyone's take on standard vinyl mesh covers (typically with UV protectant). I have a 20 x 45 pool with an Aquamatic automatic cover currently installed (it came with the house, which we bought 2 years ago). The cover is 7 years old and has a tear and probably should have been replaced a couple of years ago but I didn't notice the tear until recently. The cost to replace the cover is about $4400 and the new cover is only expected to last about 5 years (got quotes from all 3 local cover installers - Aquamatic, Pool Covers, Inc. and Pool Safe). Assuming some additional maintenance costs over the 5-year expected life, we are talking about $1K a year just for the cover. From a pure cost-benefit analysis, is the cover really saving me $1K a year, presumably in water savings (due to reduced evaporation), energy saving (from having to run the pool filter/heater less often), and chemicals (less UV means less break down)?
I know most pool companies that sell covers clearly state it is worth it, but I was wondering if any neutral party has actually tried to quantify the cost savings with a cover (I understand the analysis may change based on pool size, location, etc. but was hoping someone has done the analysis and reached a conclusion either way). I am a bit skeptical because the cover companies tell me to leave the cover on even during our sunny California days in the summer when I would think having the cover off and having the sun heat the pool would be better than keeping the cover on and having the cover absorb the sun, which likely is just heating the top of the pool. I do have a gas heater and use it regularly to keep my pool warm. Also, I am in the San Francisco East Bay area where summers get quite hot (lots of 90+ days), and my kids are all older, so the cover isn't really a safety thing for me.
I am kicking myself because water was apparently getting through the cover from a hidden tear in a seam and my automatic pool cover pump was pumping what turn out to be pool water off the cover (I thought it was just condensation), which probably cost me more water usage than the evaporation saving from the cover. Also, after 5 years, the cover companies told me that water can basically soak through the cover even without a tear. During the summer, I have been closing the cover every night and opening every morning, which obviously isn't ideal given the hassle. I also don't think my Polaris cleaner works as well with the cover on - the cover is designed to sit on the water, which hinders the flow of the Polaris hose, which has floaters and is intended to float on top of the water.
Any thoughts on the pros/cons of vinyl mesh covers would be appreciated before I make my purchasing decision.
Also, do people generally close the cover at night and then open it in the morning (especially during sunny summer days), or just keep the cover closed when not in use?
Thanks!
