I can bore for England on this subject!
The most efficient heating regime depends upon the thermal mass of your house, and of course, the amount of insulation. A lightweight well insulated house will have an entirely different heating requirement to a heavyweight well insulated house......althought the net heat-loss over the year may well be the same.
As an experiment, 10 years ago I built 2 houses side by side: one of them a super-insulated double-stud construction timber frame house, the other a super-insulated heavyweight house with an external timber frame. Both have triple glazing, a whole house ventilation system with heat recovery, and have "airlocks" (porches, conservatories etc) over the external doors.
The lightweight house costs about £70 per year to heat, and the heavyweight one, where I still live, costs about £40. Both maintain constant internal temperatures of around 21 degrees year round and through the day and night (although the lightweight one has a tendency to overheat in the summer). The heavyweght house has never lost a degree in heat over 24 hours, whatever the wether, without the heating on.
The earliest the heating has ever come on in the heavyweight house is mid November, and it generally turns itself off finally in early April. Neither house has heating upstairs, and neither need it.
My point.......I am getting to it!!!......is that the heavyweight house has less insulation than the lightweight one, and yet is clearly more efficient. Thermal mass within the insulated envelope is the key. There are a number of houses in the UK with no central heating requirement at all..........just a woodburning stove for the coldest days.....yet maintaining internal temperatures of 20 or 21 degrees. It can be done..........so long as we don't just build the way our dads did, or to the minimum requirements of the Building Regulations.
Anybody awake still?
Mike