Underfloor heating or "normal" heating - Which is cheaper?

I heard on TV today that underfloor heating is supposedly more efficient than a regular heating system because it only requires a supply temperature of 40 degrees (instead of 70 degrees). Is that really true? Can I heat my house more cheaply overall with underfloor heating?

A underfloor heating system has a lower flow temperature, which is why FB heating systems are often used in low-energy houses, as less heating energy needs to be produced. Whether you ultimately heat your house more cheaply cannot be said so easily, since the flow temperature is not the only decisive factor. Simply put, you need a certain amount of heating energy to bring a certain room to a certain temperature—regardless of which type of heating warms the room air. This would have to be calculated with regard to your house.

In my opinion, the normal heating system is better because the underfloor heating is costly to repair if it breaks down.

Underfloor heating is more ecological but more expensive to install than radiators. The maintenance costs are about the same for both. The advantage of underfloor heating is that there are no more radiators. So, more space is available.

Hello,

It may be true that underfloor heating is more ecological than radiators. However, radiators warm up faster than underfloor heating. I also find the indoor climate better. The regulation of underfloor heating also takes too long for me.

Best regards
Annegret

I see advantages in underfloor heating. Of course, a heat pump must be installed, and it has a lower supply temperature than the classic radiator.