> Underfloor heating can use lower temperature water and is more efficient than radiators.
Not lot more efficient when you come from thousand degree fire.
As I said above, heat-pump is a lot about how BIG your heat exchangers can be. A small exchanger must run hot for the same BTU (KW) of heat. Coming down from fire (or electric), this is effective. Pumping up from Maine/Madison air, every extra degree is more work for the pump. Less heat for your power dollar. While a large-area warm-air duct system would be intrusive, well-developed technology (plastic pipes) turns the whole floor into heat exchanger, and typically runs just above desired air temp.
FWIW, in the US "hydronic" heat is deluxe and most houses run hot-air in ducts. Back when we took 70% eff and 160 F (71C) HOT-air, duct sizes were manageable. My 95% system runs warm 105F (40C) air, and the air volume was a constraint in my design. Larger ducts would be too much rip-up work. I was forced to put in a proper cool return.
Not lot more efficient when you come from thousand degree fire.
As I said above, heat-pump is a lot about how BIG your heat exchangers can be. A small exchanger must run hot for the same BTU (KW) of heat. Coming down from fire (or electric), this is effective. Pumping up from Maine/Madison air, every extra degree is more work for the pump. Less heat for your power dollar. While a large-area warm-air duct system would be intrusive, well-developed technology (plastic pipes) turns the whole floor into heat exchanger, and typically runs just above desired air temp.
FWIW, in the US "hydronic" heat is deluxe and most houses run hot-air in ducts. Back when we took 70% eff and 160 F (71C) HOT-air, duct sizes were manageable. My 95% system runs warm 105F (40C) air, and the air volume was a constraint in my design. Larger ducts would be too much rip-up work. I was forced to put in a proper cool return.