Infrared Heating and Heating Panels

Infrared heating panels warm people, walls and furniture directly rather than heating the air first. A panel sends out far infrared rays, the same kind of radiant warmth the sun gives, and any surface the rays reach warms up and then radiates back into the room¹. Because nothing has to heat a large volume of air before you feel anything, the warmth is close to instant: makers say you start to feel warm almost immediately after switching a panel on³.

The catch is the fuel. Infrared panels are electric, and electricity costs about four times as much as gas for the same amount of energy². A panel converts essentially all the electricity it draws into heat, but so does every other electric heater; what infrared changes is where that heat goes and how quickly you feel it. Independent advice is that a well-controlled infrared system will probably cost less to run than standard electric panel heaters, but that there is little research available to confirm running cost savings². This page sets out how the panels work, what they cost to run, how to size and mount them, the safety rules, and where the evidence is still thin.

How a panel heats you directly rather than the air

Almost every heating system in a UK home works by convection. A radiator, storage heater or warm-air system heats air, the air rises, circulates and eventually warms the surfaces and the people in the room. Infrared does the opposite: it transfers heat to objects and people directly, without heating something in between such as air, water or metal⁹. Energy Saving Trust describes it as heat radiating outwards from the heater and warming any surfaces it comes into contact with².

The panels sold for homes use far infrared, the long-wavelength end of the infrared spectrum. Makers describe the effect as the same kind of heat emitted by the sun, felt directly on the skin, with no energy spent warming the air first¹. One maker's comparison puts it simply: infrared heating directly heats the walls, floor and ceiling of a building, building up thermal mass which then starts radiating back into the room⁹. The same principle appears in other products, including far infrared underfloor heating, which heats the people and objects in a room rather than the entire space¹⁰.

Two consequences follow from this that matter for comfort. First, because the room's fabric is warmed rather than just the air, makers claim a smaller temperature gap between the top and bottom of a room than convection heating gives¹. Second, because there is no convection current, there is no stuffiness and less movement of air, which makers link to a lower risk of mould and dampness in walls¹ and to fewer airflows on which allergens can travel¹¹. These comfort and damp claims come mostly from makers rather than independent trials, which is worth holding in mind; the independent position is simply that infrared heats surfaces rather than air, and that little research confirms the wider claims².

What instant heating really delivers in a lived-in room

The speed claim is one of infrared's most consistent selling points, and it has a real physical basis. A convection heater must warm a volume of air before the room feels different; a radiant panel warms whatever is in its path as soon as it reaches operating temperature. Makers state that warm-up times are effectively a thing of the past, with warmth felt almost immediately after the panel is switched on³, and that infrared heaters generally provide warmth a good deal quicker than most convection systems¹².

The practical limit is range. One maker's guidance is that the effective range of an infrared panel is approximately 3 metres, with optimal warmth felt within the first 2 metres¹³. That has a direct implication for room layout: a panel warms the zone it faces, not the whole room uniformly. In a long living room or an L-shaped space, someone sitting behind the panel's line of sight will feel much less benefit than someone in front of it. This is why zoned and multi-panel arrangements, covered later, matter more with infrared than with a radiator that eventually stirs the whole room's air.

For a household's day-to-day experience, "instant" means the panel behaves more like a bathroom heat lamp than a central heating system: useful for quick, targeted warmth when you walk into a cold room, and dependent on the room's surfaces gradually taking up heat for anything like whole-room comfort. The warmed fabric then releases heat back, which is what carries comfort between panel cycles⁹.

Point of use efficiency of 100% and its limits

Every maker of infrared panels quotes a near-perfect efficiency figure. Herschel states its heaters are 100% efficient, with every watt converted into radiant warmth⁵. Tansun claims up to 100% efficiency at source¹⁴, and another maker puts energy conversion rates at around 98%³. Far infrared heaters, one technical guide states, convert nearly 100% of the electrical energy into heat⁶.

All of these statements are true, and none of them is the whole story. Every electric resistance heater, from a £15 fan heater to a £500 designer panel, converts essentially all the electricity it draws into heat; that is a property of electricity, not of infrared. The efficiency claim that actually distinguishes infrared is about what the heat does: warming the surface area of objects takes less energy than heating a large volume of air¹, and radiant heat transfer is described by makers as a very efficient form of electric heating⁹. One maker goes further and claims a 400W infrared heater will produce the same amount of heat as a 1kW conventional heater³. That is a maker's claim about felt warmth rather than measured room temperature, and it is not supported by independent testing in the material available; treat it as marketing, not physics.

The honest framing is this: at the panel, infrared is as efficient as any electric heater. Where it may save energy is in control, heating the parts of a room and the times of day that matter rather than the whole volume continuously. Whether that translates into lower bills depends on how well the system is controlled and how well the building holds warmth, and on that point the independent evidence is thin².

Hourly running costs for an 800W panel

Because a panel's draw is fixed and known, its hourly cost is simple arithmetic: the wattage multiplied by your electricity unit rate. A 600W panel run for six hours at 25p per unit costs 90 pence per day, on the maker's own worked example⁵. An 800W panel at the same 25p rate costs 20p per hour of use, and a 900W panel 22.5p, though the actual figure depends on your tariff. Independent advice puts annual running costs for infrared panels similar to panel heaters, at around £1080 a year for a flat⁷.

How that compares with alternatives depends on what you compare it with:

• Against gas central heating: electricity costs about four times as much as gas for the same amount of energy², so a whole-house infrared system will usually cost more to run than a gas boiler delivering the same heat, whatever the panel-level efficiency.
• Against standard electric panel heaters: a well-controlled infrared system will probably cost less to run, because panels can be zoned and directed rather than heating whole rooms².
• Against portable electric heaters: Which? testing found fan heaters cost 60p per hour on average and convector heaters 48p per hour, against 33p for oil-filled radiators¹⁵. Infrared panels of similar wattage draw similar power; the difference is in the warmth you feel per unit drawn, not the meter.

For a household thinking about energy independence, the running-cost picture is double-edged. Infrared removes the gas connection entirely, which removes standing charges for gas and any dependence on a gas supplier, but it deepens dependence on the electricity grid and on electricity prices, which are the higher of the two. Pairing with solar, discussed below, is what changes that balance.

Choosing wattage for insulation, ceilings and open layouts

Sizing an infrared system is less standardised than sizing a boiler, and the rules of thumb come from makers rather than independent standards. The general guide is approximately 50 to 60 watts per square metre in a well-insulated room, rising for poorly insulated spaces⁶. A manufacturer of hex-shaped panels makes the same point from the other direction: published room-size guides are starting points only, and insulation, glazing, ceiling height and target temperature must also be considered¹⁶.

Panel construction sets some fixed physics. Infrared panels require between 900 and 1000 watts per square metre of panel surface area to produce panel temperatures of 90 to 100°C¹⁷, which is why a high-output panel is physically large: a 900W panel needs roughly a square metre of surface. That temperature also explains the safety rules in the next section.

Practical points for a real house:

• Some rooms need more than one panel if the panel is the room's main heat source², particularly where the 3-metre effective range¹³ does not cover the seating area.
• Open-plan spaces are the hardest case: a single panel's radiant zone covers only part of the floor area, so a large kitchen-diner may need several panels aimed at different zones rather than one big one.
• High ceilings hurt convection heating more than infrared, but they also mean more fabric to warm before the room holds heat, and makers' wattage guides assume typical ceiling heights¹⁶.
• Poor insulation pushes the watts-per-square-metre figure up⁶, and in a poorly insulated home the running cost of any direct electric heating climbs accordingly.

For sizing a whole-house system, the honest position is that there is no independent UK sizing standard for infrared comparable to boiler sizing, so households depend on installer judgement and makers' guides, and should expect quotes to vary.

Mounting options: wall, ceiling, freestanding and picture styles

Infrared heating comes in more forms than the white wall panel most people picture. Panels can be fitted on walls or ceilings, or used as plug-in freestanding heaters³, and the technology also appears as underfloor heating or as a fabric-like "electric wallpaper" that can be plastered over and decorated¹⁸. Ceiling mounting is often used because it puts the panel out of reach and gives an unobstructed downward field of radiant heat.

The forms differ mainly in appearance and price, not in output:

• Plain wall or ceiling panels are the cheapest per watt. A 700W classic panel has been listed at £186.56 and a 900W classic panel at £228.35, both reduced from higher earlier prices¹⁹.
• Picture panels carry a printed image on the front. Herschel's Inspire Picture panel can be customised with a family portrait, a favourite photo or a child's artwork, and starts at £539¹⁷. The image changes the look, not the heat: output is set by wattage.
• Freestanding and portable panels can be plugged into the mains², though free-standing panels are usually wired into the electricity supply by an electrician². Portable units bring the tip-over risk discussed below.
• Shaped and designer panels, such as hexagonal models, offer the same far infrared output with overheat protection built in¹⁶.

Mounting position affects comfort more than output. A panel mounted high on a wall or on the ceiling has a clear field of view over the room's occupants; a panel behind a sofa or blocked by furniture loses much of its effect, because infrared travels in straight lines and warms only what it reaches².

Fitting, upkeep and the covering rule

Installation is one of infrared's strongest practical advantages. Panels do not require pipework³, so there is none of the disruption that comes with gas central heating, and an electrician can install them straightforwardly³. Independent advice confirms infrared heaters do not need much maintenance and could last a long time², and makers state their panels require no maintenance or servicing, using solid-state elements with nothing to service⁸. There is no obligation for annual servicing or certification, and no need for ductwork or pipework⁶.

That freedom from servicing is genuine, but it comes with one rule that overrides everything else:

The fire risk is real rather than theoretical because panels run hot by design: 90 to 100°C at the surface for standard panels¹⁷, and a defined infrared panel operates at at least 75°C⁵. A towel, laundry or piece of furniture against a panel traps that heat, and the panel's own overheat protection, where fitted, is the only thing between the trapped heat and a fire.

For a household weighing independence, the maintenance picture is favourable: no annual engineer visit, no gas safety check, no water pressure to monitor. The dependence that remains is the electricity supply itself. A gas boiler keeps working through a power cut (for heating, if it has a permanent live supply for controls); an all-infrared home has no heating at all during an outage, unless a battery or backup supply covers it.

Off-gas homes, retrofits and zoned control with infrared

Infrared is very commonly considered for off-gas homes and modern all-electric developments²⁰, and that is where its economics are strongest: for a home with no gas connection, the comparison is not with a cheap gas boiler but with other electric options such as storage heaters, electric radiators and panel heaters or an electric boiler. It is also frequently specified in refurbishment and retrofit projects, because it can often be installed with less disruption than traditional heating systems²⁰: no pipework, no floor lifting, no cylinder cupboard.

The control story is where infrared earns its place in an energy-independence strategy. Each panel is independently controlled, making it easier to optimise the temperature of each room¹², and panels can be installed in specific rooms so users heat only the areas they occupy²¹. Smart heating controls link to your phone, letting you turn the system on or off and change the temperature when you are not at home²², and most smart controls work via smartphone, tablet, laptop or a smart speaker²³. Panels can be regulated remotely via a smartphone app¹².

Solar pairing is the natural extension. Many modern homes combine infrared with rooftop solar as part of an all-electric heating strategy²⁰. Independent advice on the wider principle, made about electric underfloor heating, is that solar panels could power a dry electric heating system, and a battery storing excess solar electricity would make this more efficient²⁴. The same logic applies to panels: they are simple resistive loads, so any solar generation can run them, and a battery bridges the gap between midday generation and evening heating demand. That is the route by which an infrared household reduces what it buys from a supplier rather than merely switching which fuel it buys.

Zoned control also changes behaviour in a way a single-thermostat gas system cannot: unoccupied rooms can be left cold without affecting the rooms in use, which is the main mechanism by which a well-controlled infrared system undercuts standard panel heaters on running cost².

Drawbacks and where the evidence falls short

The limitations deserve as firm a statement as the benefits.

• Electricity is the expensive fuel. Electricity costs about four times as much as gas for the same amount of energy², so infrared's running costs are structurally higher than gas heating for the same heat delivered, whatever the panel-level efficiency.
• The evidence base is thin. Energy Saving Trust states there is little research available to confirm running cost savings², and its separate advice on electric wallpaper, a close cousin of infrared panels, says there is little conclusive research about the effectiveness of electric wallpaper and infrared heating²⁵. A 2023 report on infrared in social housing noted panels have higher efficiencies than condensing gas boilers at the point of use²⁶, but point-of-use efficiency is not the same as demonstrated bill savings.
• The market is young. One maker concedes infrared is very much in its infancy in terms of where it sits in the heating market¹, and consumers across Europe still lack good information about heating system labelling²⁷.
• Knowledge is the barrier for households too. In the government's Winter 2025 public attitudes tracker, 29% of owner-occupiers unlikely to install low carbon heating cited a lack of sufficient knowledge, rising to around a third not knowing enough to decide about heat pumps²⁸.
• Uneven heat is inherent. The 3-metre range and 2-metre optimal zone¹³ mean infrared is directional comfort, not uniform room temperature, and open-plan or cluttered rooms need careful panel placement.
• Damp and health claims rest mostly on makers. Claims that infrared produces very dry heat with less risk of mould¹, reverses the conditions necessary for damp¹¹ and suits wellness settings²⁹ come from manufacturers' own material, not independent trials.

None of this makes infrared a poor choice; it makes it a choice whose strengths are targeted warmth, simple installation, no servicing and easy zoning, and whose weaknesses are electricity prices, thin independent evidence and directional heat. For an off-gas home, a retrofit where pipework is impractical, or a household with solar and battery aiming to heat from its own generation, those strengths are the ones that matter. For a gas-heated home weighing a like-for-like swap, the fourfold fuel price gap² is the number to start from, and the honest answer is that no independent UK evidence yet confirms the savings the marketing promises.