Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

kzb

Members
  • Posts

    9,456
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by kzb

  1. At 107 Niddrie Road in the south of the city, one of the red sandstone-fronted tenements, so emblematic of Glasgow, is being ripped apart and put together again. Heating is a mix of air source heat pumps and high efficiency gas boilers – but the flats are so well insulated little energy is required. These projects show what can be done - but at a price. The investment at Cedar Court worked out at more than £48,000 per flat, while unit costs for the tenement retrofit will be higher. There are also practical difficulties in rolling out such measures to buildings that are a mix of owner occupiers and tenants. And perhaps the biggest question of all - who will pay? (my bold) https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/extra/e8vkjmttbw/glasgow-scotland-the-last-best-hope-to-fight-climate-change Notice even this still uses gas boilers ! Even though they've spent more than £48k per flat (and you can peruse the extensive modifications in detail on that link) they are still using gas.
  2. People have been so let down by all major parties. In coming years the bill for net zero is going to start landing on their doormats. It is going to be impossible for the ConLab-BBC-C4 machine to keep people onboard with their own destruction. Look at France, they have someone to the right of Le Pen running for pres next time. I would say those plots will be something else completely 20 years on from now.
  3. This is an updated study on offshore wind costs, now taking into account 2020 company accounts data. The announced costs for windfarms after 2024 do suggest a reduction in levelised costs, but only to around the £100/MWh mark. These reductions are due to the Dogger Bank windfarms, which are being built in shallow waters. However, they are also far offshore – up to 200km. The best guide we have as to the effect of such distances on costs is Hornsea 1, which, as we have seen, has turned out very expensive. So it would not be at all surprising if these huge windfarms turned out to be no cheaper at all. The government is relying on a revolution in offshore wind costs to make Net Zero more affordable. Minister have claimed that it has happened already. But If it it doesn’t happen, the cost to consumers will run into hundreds of billions of pounds. And unfortunately the hard evidence set out here shows that it is not happening. https://www.netzerowatch.com/new-data-on-offshore-wind-costs/ To add my 2 cents to this, these costs do not even include anything for energy storage. Which will be completely necessary after we've got rid of the gas turbine backups.
  4. But is that borne out by those Ipsos Mori (literally: they die) plots? I am not sure TBH. You could interpret the 2017-2019 plots to conclude the drift from left to right with age has never been stronger. Given that we have an aging population that would be good news for the Tories, not bad. Please note I am not saying this IS the case. As others have said there is the Brexit factor. But that interpretation is possible.
  5. I think we have to. Wind turbines without backup or massive energy storage are useless for an electricity grid. Peak gas usage in winter is reportedly about 300GW (not sure if this includes the gas used to generate electricity or not, but it makes little difference for this back of envelope estimation).
  6. Don't know about the mortgages. Had a quick look at the link, but have not looked into exactly what the settings all mean. It's quite possible it is all wrong. UK sea levels are rising at about 2mm a year, so by 2030 that is only 18mm increase from now. Before anyone starts, these plots are pasted in direct from the NOAA website. I picked Sheerness because it is near London and has records going back to 1830. Aberdeen because it has an almost complete record back to 1860. Many more plots are available and you are free to check these for yourselves. https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_global_country.html?gid=1222
  7. The useful lifetime is, what, 25 years ?
  8. With the cladding, we can't even see the horizontal cracks. The first time we know we have corroded wall ties is when the exterior wall falls off presumably.
  9. Because they've built loads of the things already, may as well use them for something useful. A bigger worry for my proposal is the "off peak" electricity for the storage heaters. I am doubtful there will be an off peak time in the future, because of all the EV charging, and if everyone has storage heaters, the middle of the night could actually be peak demand time.
  10. You're not muddled on the government policy angle. I still say "it ain't gonna happen". It'd be better to use the wind turbines solely for hydrogen production. That hydrogen would then be used for vehicles. Wind and solar are useless for the grid because they need either backup with gas turbines or enormous energy storage. Virtually the whole 100% electricity capacity needs to be nuclear. With that, we could go back to storage heaters and Economy 7.
  11. thanks, scary stuff. We don't have any horizontal cracks at the moment so hopefully I'll be dead before it happens.
  12. That seems to be what you were doing. You are still mixing together two unrelated numbers here. The COP doesn't have anything to do with the insulation. It's purely the kW of heat delivered divided by the kW of electricity consumed in so doing. The COP varies with the difference in outside and inside temperatures. The bigger the difference the smaller the COP. The energy efficiency is almost another word for COP in this context. With the next bit you are confusing efficiency and effectiveness. The max. heat output is typically much lower than a gas boiler. This is why you need all the insulation, because otherwise you will be cold. Also, like you say, you will end up leaving it on for much longer, because it can't heat up your house from cold quickly. IMHO it will inevitably end up more expensive to run because of this factor alone.
  13. You have got the COP definition correct in the first sentence. However, when you think about it, the COP will actually reduce as the internal temperature increases (all other things being equal). This means that insulation will likely decrease your COP, but at the same time your bills would still be reduced. No-one checked our wall ties before putting in the cavity wall insulation ! You have me worried now. Are there any symptoms of rusting wall ties?
  14. You said I got paid 50p for each piece of made up FUD. So I should still get paid.
  15. To be fair, it'll be better when we are homeless with the extra £640m.
  16. Yep this jumped out at me also ! This is the reality of those carbon targets for the elite. It's only the plebs who are going to pay.
  17. I heard there are millions of homes that shouldn't have had the cavity-wall insulation, never mind the cladding ! BTW, the ASH COP figure does not depend on insulation. It depends on the temperature difference between outside and inside. In the budget today he has cut the duty on internal flights. Go figure that one whilst your daughter's friend is being impoverished and having her house wrecked.
  18. Well I've not been paid so it mustn't be FUD.
  19. I am hoping that when this event is out of the way they'll quietly drop all the unachievable targets. It's clearly unsustainable politically for our people to be impoverished whilst bribing India et al not to burn quite as much coal. If we had a referendum on this, certain people in this country would learn a lot.
  20. Those people won't suffer though. If they can pay £50k (or whatever it is) for an SUV (plus their other car of course), they can buy an E-SUV just as well. Although you can probably look forward to them running out of charge outside school, leading to even worse congestion.
  21. (1) It is going to be seen as a ridiculously one-sided deal in the future. You missed the fact that we are obligated to prioritise buying whatever power they can produce from wind ahead of fossil fuel sources. (2) If renewables were really that cheap, they wouldn't need the current high prices to be competitive.
  22. If you look at my post in context you will see it makes sense. The article was saying millions will die as as result of climate change. Included in that are deaths from extreme weather events such as hurricanes. I am informing people that the number killed has reduced over the past decades. If you research this you will find it to be true. Here in Britain I don't think we need to be too concerned. OK so we get a few more days above 35 degrees, not the end of the world.
  23. Numbers killed by adverse weather conditions world-wide has fallen with time. Here in Britain it is hardly a leading cause of death and neither will it be. I suppose you could include the thousands of pensioners who supposedly die of cold, who knows which way that will go. Insane heating costs might make more die, or increased temperatures might help them. Wind energy has not fallen in price. Our large wind investment has not protected us from record electricity prices. Ignore the strike prices, we will not see wind energy at £47/MWh in practice. They are not obligated to keep us supplied nor to supply us with electricity at the strike price. It was bid to win the contract pure and simple.
  24. All companies do this ! Fossil fuels are still providing 90% of your energy in this country, even if you have a Tesla. You know, in 1971, air pollution was four times worse than it is now. I recall seeing the blue haze over Manchester on the rare sunny days. Earlier than that, in the 1950's and 60's it must've been terrible in an urban area, with all the coal burning. The people who lived through all that are now in God's waiting room, the longest-lived generation in history. I think some people worry too much.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.