chronyx

Well we're in a chicken and egg situation then, as the regs themselves state they apply only to new installations and circuits. EICRs can be carried out to 18th edition standards but only require C3 codes for things like RCD protection on existing older installations. I usually word it as 'upgrade strongly advised but suitable for continued use' as long as the standard inspection and test has been passed.

That's why I blanket-termed them with 'involved'!

There is something particularly obnoxious about those involved with 'luxury' London property

BS7671 is non-statutory anyway, and applies only to new installations (Not retroactively applicable to older installations)

Piotr Zbrjski will be doing a lot of sign offs then No he's just gone back to Poland officer...you just missed him

If it's in The Guardian it must be true.

Science really is magic!

OK but APART from that little slip-up....?

The plot-twist here is that I actually agree with the CO2 mob that there is a climate emergency. Just not what the government will tell you it is. Too much money to be made, and empires to be built.

I agree with this. Post WW2 the Town and Country planning act...you know the rest. Another victory for the government, who (Seem to, allegedly, some might say) actively hate us.

The only thing i care less about than what an economist thinks of the economy is what an economist thinks about climate change. ? whoops i was aiming for a lol face but this place sucks on a phone browser

Why do all climate change 'solutions' involve giving more power, tax and resources to the government? (With governments track record as it stands)

My mistake. The science is settled.

As is the CO2 hypotheses

I know I've posted this before. But if i keep believing people who are this consistently wrong (whether out of malice or not), then who is the science denier?

Not at all - lucky ours is only 0.04% really!

You tell me. How much CO2 is on there on those planets?

Thanks. I can understand the initial "huh?" When, for example, galactic cosmic rays are mentioned. But in the information age, ignorance is not an excuse.

And there we are, back to insults as soon as the science goes beyond CO2 = BAD. Absolutely pathetic. Your not understanding it does not make it any less correct.

Total solar irradiance is only a small part of the Suns input to our climate Edit: which is why i don't disagree with the fact the climate has changed/is changing/will always changed. We were lucky enough to live in a time when the sun was really active. That's all that caused the warming. It's activity level is dropping now. This solar cycle is predicted to be lower than the last (see NASA for details) They tried using pure CO2 (Not a 0.04 percent blend) in double glazing. It didn't work.

Appreciate your points, but the predictions of snowless winters and drowned cities of the man-made climate change lobby have failed for over 30 years. They have a fantastic PR department as any other entity with a track record like that would be taken as seriously as HPC takes the Bank of England.

Anyway, here is today's "it's just the weather which is nothing to do with climate because of reasons" https://electroverse.net/b-c-is-about-to-be-colder-than-its-ever-been-in-over-a-century/

I'm amazed at how global warming believers confuse mass-delusion with science. Is the calling people names one of the first things they teach? You can scour this whole thread where I've been called all sorts of things by the 'intelligent, reasonable, educated' lot. They are always the first to resort to mud-flinging though.

https://electroverse.net/at-least-25-die-as-record-breaking-snowfall-buries-balochistan-pakistan/ More warming