you don't pump the paraffin - you store it in a tank and extract heat from it using a heat pump.
Discussion
More complex and more fragile than hot water, with fewer synergies and small volumetric capacity.
That's a "no" from me, but then I live in a climate where air-source heat pumps never ice over. Your milage will vary...
a car interior is 40F hotter than exterior on a sunny day without any insulation. with strategically placed skylights you can heat a home entirely with sunlight ( without solar panels ) so long as it has enough thermal mass to keep that warmth overnight.
one way to do it is to build out of concrete and place insulation on OUTSIDE of the wall ( so thermal mass is inside ). another is water tank. another is paraffin.
the difference is some of these must be planned in advance while others can be retrofitted later.
now i remember i was considering paraffin specifically for future retrofit of just a standard home. i was concerned a water tank might not fit. paraffin tank can be smaller because it uses latent heat of phase change.
people custom building passive homes use the exterior insulation / wall thermal mass method. the benefit is there are literally zero additional parts versus a regular home - just higher material costs ( concrete vs wood frame ).
you might also get higher comfort with such a home because you wouldn't have any kinds of vents blowing hot air - just walls holding heat from day time.
That works by itself only in a very mild climate. I physically cover my skylights every summer, and it helps only a little.
But as part of an "all of the above" indoor climate management system I strongly approve.
Paraffin as a purely passive system is attractive, although the phase change temperature is a little high. As soon as you add a heat pump, an insulated tank and maybe radiators, you're better going with water. Higher volumetric heat capacity than paraffin, but needs a wider range of temperatures to make use of that.
I have a rather extravagant planted aquarium in my living room largely for passive thermal management (and for guests to stare at, since I refuse to own a TV). Paraffin would have a slightly better heat capacity over water, but only if I let the room heat to 37C!
the amount of solar gain would depend on surface area of skylights and the amount of insulation in the house. with small skylights and thin insulation you would not gain a lot of temperature. but if your entire roof is made out of glass and it's something like quadruple pane glass filled with krypton gas and your other walls are a foot of insulation and your floor is painted black you would probably be able to hit 100+ degrees inside when it is freezing outside with nothing but sunlight as a heat source.
cooling passively would be more difficult but not impossible. for example in NYC area ( where i am ) deep ground well temperature is about 53F so with a vertical ground loop system you could tap into that 53F when it's 95F outside for some passive cooling ... if you covered your roof and walls with mirrors
it's all possible the question is only at which point does it become ridiculous ...
i'm just opposed to people who do NOTHING and then demand we build more nuclear reactors.
reminds me of a fat guy who was demanding that children are vaxxed for COVID beause he was in a risk group for dying from it ... yeah mate maybe YOU should put down the spoon, rather than making kids take the vax when they are at zero risk from COVID and YOU are.
anyway it is not our job to tell Klaus Schwab HOW to maintain our standard of living. our job is to MURDER anybody who tells us that our standard of living ( but not their standard of living ) should go down to save the planet.
let Klaus figure out what the right mix of green technologies should be. whether it is solar, wind or nuclear or coal - i don't really care.
i'm just opposed to people who LEGITIMIZE THE SCAM of "global warming" by proposing nuclear as "the solution"
solution TO WHAT ???
the real solution to environmental damage is to EUTHANIZE EVERYBODY WITH IQ BELOW 100.
that would take earth population from 8 bil to about 2 bil and help a lot with environment without anything of value lost.
but the Jews don't like that because their democracy scam runs on retards.
nuclear literally SOLVES NOTHING.
LOL Diss you know many things but not test design. Your "death test" will be as gameable as any other government program.
Nuclear energy is not a cure for the ills of mass politics or of collusive elite cliques.
It is, however, a treatment that can keep the "patient" alive.
Not to mention he won't survive as he'll find many far better at killing him... 😂
Facts :D
the death test will work very well if i design it
it will work acceptably well if it is designed by people who want it to work
and it will fail if it is designed by people who want it to fail
you also fail to realize i don't "know" things - i make them up. it's a perk of being a genius. i wouldn't worry about my ability to design a death test.
i would start by testing those in prison, then illegals, then those on welfare and in nursing homes, then the retirees, then the unemployed, then the chronically ill etc.
by the time i got to testing gainfully employed healthy young people i would figure out how to test properly.
Klaus doesn't have a clue. We know Klaus doesn't have a clue. Klaus knows we know Klaus doesn't have a clue. And Klaus doesn't care.
Except for the last bit, this is Govt 101.
Some governments are getting out of the way at least a little so that people can use fission to make energy for other people.
They are the smart ones - taxpayers whos lights are on are less likely to start burning things.
Re your glass - CAPEX is not costless, and I can see many sources of fragility in your plan. But simpler forms of it can work well during daylight hours. I have a friend who plans to add a commercial-size plastic greenhouse to her modified reefer container tiny home that she lives in on a mountainside, very interested in how well it works. I can confirm reefer containers are ridiculously effectively insulated even with doors and windows.
my gated community has two swimming pools - "indoor" and outdoor.
the "Indoor" pool is actually covered only by a plastic greenhouse, so it's basically outdoor except i went swimming there two days ago and it was toasty warm while the artificial lake right next to it was FROZEN.
in summer they open windows in that greenhouse to cool it down.
it does have an HVAC but i'm not sure it actually needs it.
granted, target air temperature for a swimming pool is about 90F versus 75F for a residence so cooling a greenhouse to 75F will definitely be more challenging than to 90F ... but heating is not an issue
you only need glass on sides facing where the sun is in winter. in fact it is recommended to NOT have glass on sides facing where the sun is in summer. if you simply position glass correctly and insulate properly you may not need anything else at all.
the roof of the pool greenhouse is plastic which is translucent but not transparent - to reduce the harshness of the sun, an also to save weight.
the walls are clear glass for the views.
it looks similar to image below, but larger and with a separate hot tub:
when i first saw it i was skeptical it would work in our cold climate here in US North-East but it works perfectly. i under-estimated the greenhouse effect. it seems to easily overcome the relative lack of insulation.