Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
interestrateripoff

Low-carbon Strategy Will Raise Household Energy Bills By £200 A Year

Recommended Posts

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/poli...icle6684912.ece

Household energy bills will rise by more than £200 a year under the Government’s low-carbon strategy being announced next week.

Meeting Britain’s targets for cutting emissions could push another 1.7 million households into fuel poverty, meaning that seven million homes would be spending more than 10 per cent of their income on fuel.

The Renewable Energy Strategy, to be published on Wednesday, will state that more than £100 billion will have to be invested in renewable energy infrastructure, including 7,000 wind turbines, by 2020.

The Government has bound itself legally to cutting CO2 emissions by 34 per cent by 2020 and 80 per cent by 2050. To achieve this, it must increase the amount of energy generated from renewable sources from 2 per cent at present to 15 per cent by 2020.

The strategy estimates that energy bills will have to rise by about 20 per cent to pay for the investment. The average household currently pays about £1,150 a year for electricity and gas, a small decline on last year but still double the amount paid in 2003.

The cost of converting to renewable energy and modernising Britain’s power supply would add about £230 to annual bills. Costs are likely to ratchet up quickly as the investment is made, with the increase reaching 20 per cent within three years.

Industry estimates due to be published next week will take an even gloomier view and claim that bills could rise by 30 per cent.

Ed Miliband, the Energy and Climate Change Secretary, admitted to The Times that energy bills would rise, but said that the carbon-reduction targets were not the only factor. “There is upward pressure on energy prices whether you go for a high-carbon or a low-carbon alternative,†he said. “The costs of not acting on climate change far outweigh than the costs of acting.â€

Excellent we are run by total idiots, in trying to move us to low carbon economy they will increase the numbers in fuel poverty.

This will of course mean another govt initiative to tackle fuel poverty.

Can't wait I wonder how they will tackle that problem?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Low carbon investment in the form of solar hot water or even a PV panel on every home would reduce the need for power plants and be cheaper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Low carbon investment in the form of solar hot water or even a PV panel on every home would reduce the need for power plants and be cheaper.

I think if it were cheaper everyone would be doing it. How much do you spend on water heating? £200 a year? How much are these systems, £2500-£5000. So you'd recover your initial outlay in 12-20 years. Of course assuming it continues to work for that long.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think if it were cheaper everyone would be doing it. How much do you spend on water heating? £200 a year? How much are these systems, £2500-£5000. So you'd recover your initial outlay in 12-20 years. Of course assuming it continues to work for that long.

It would be cheaper if the govt decided to implement it properly. If they avoid quangoiing it then it could be managed cheaply and effectively. Although now I've typed that out, it'd be insane to think this govt could do it cheaply.

But it's what should be done.

navitron.org.uk

BUDGETKIT

budget kit - 1x20tube 47mm panel

includes: roof mounting kit, retro-fit coil, antifreeze, circulation pump, pressurised system kit, filling kit, pipework and armaflex insulation

£ 899.00

(incl. VAT)

£ 781.74

(excl. VAT)

When you consider how much they will have to spend building new power stations ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We could theoretically generate most of our electricity for much of the time from wind turbines. 30,000 large 2MW wind turbines would have the capacity to generate the country's total electricity requirement if they were all operating at maximum output (which would only happen rarely). BUT...Until recently the mere idea of that would have even turned most members of Greenpeace into Nimbys since the idea of covering the landscape with that number of giant turbines would be absurd.

Then someone had the idea of siting the majority of these turbines offshore - not along the coast but far out to sea in the North Sea, which is mostly fairly shalllow. Now this is on the way to becoming a reality over the next few years.

The technology exists and a lot of the offshore construction expertise is transferable from the dwindling North Sea oil and gas industries.

In a few year's time a signicant proportion of our electricity could be coming from windfarms in the Dogger Bank area.

That's in the Crown Estate's round 3 offshore proposals, so it's 'got legs'.

I don't think anyone's advocating that we derive all our electricity from wind power, but if one starts by looking at what it would take do do just that, one can work backwards to see what would be sensible - given that other forms of power generation, renewable or otherwise, would be part of the balance too.

Edited by blankster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My tuppence worth:

I like the offshore wind farms; they're lit up like christmas trees and make navigating easier, as the dangerous banks are where the turbines are. I suspect however that they will underestimate the breakdown rate (for some reason scientists always seem to under-estimate the power of the sea), so it will end up being twice as expensive as forecast.

However, the politicians want to siphon money into the pockets of their friends, so we're going to get nuclear anyway. Nuclear is about embezzlement of public funds into private pockets, not energy IMO.

The Tories are partly responsible for this mess, by the "dash to gas" (ie allowing the generators to close every facility except gas and thereby siphoning more profits to shareholders), when they knew the gas would only last for 20 years. Now, we're reaping the consequence, which is being extorted by the Russians until we get up an alternative.

Lastly, I hear the computer rich are thinking the same can be done with solar panels as they did with computers: much cheaper, smaller and more efficient. If they're right, that may help long term too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a great supporter of wind and other renewables too, but wind is an opportunistic power source, dependent on the wind blowing - but out at sea it is blowing for much of the time.

Some of turbine makers produce beefed up maritime versions of the equipment - this means mainly protecting the structure and its equipment from damage in damp, salt air.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Assuming peak oil is here , then energy prices will go back up if and when we come out of recession

(or the rest of the world does) . So a mere 20% on energy prices would be a small price to pay for

energy security .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/poli...icle6684912.ece

Excellent we are run by total idiots, in trying to move us to low carbon economy they will increase the numbers in fuel poverty.

This will of course mean another govt initiative to tackle fuel poverty.

Can't wait I wonder how they will tackle that problem?

Agreed...but then, consider the impact on carbon emissions that moving even more people into fuel poverty could achieve...

S'truth, if 'they' make it financially impossible for a whole bunch of people to keep warm over winter then 'they' might actually meet their targets.

Many people could well freeze to death of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the thin end of the wedge getting thicker.

First we have Thatcher change the tax structure from direct income (progressive) taxes to indirect (regressive) consumption taxes. Now its intensifying, being levied particularly on basic neccessities. Our masters will only be happy when we're freezing, starving, and homeless.

Taxes should be based on ability to pay, nothing else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think one of the key issues is getting the home tight and really well insulated.

I've been in a rented house since nov 08. That 6 months of rubbish weather has equated to £550 in gas bills alone!!!!

It's a poorly insulated and very leaky house so immediately got cold when you turn off the heating. At home with a baby, you just have to keep putting on the heating.

Moving out though to a much better insulated house in Aug. I'll be interested to see how the consumption changes over the same period next winter.

If the government can seriously tackle the home and business consumption first, this should show a massive decrease in energy consumption.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone know how much the Chinese and Indian low-carbon strategy is costing their 'consumers'?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Carbon derived energy is reaching the end of its days for the first world.

Renewables = energy security and cleaner air.

All the gas fired generators are the real waste of money going forward.

If it costs it costs...our monetary problems stem from bailing out the spivs and grabbers in the City.

Edited by bricor mortis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anyone know how much the Chinese and Indian low-carbon strategy is costing their 'consumers'?

They are also installing the lions share of world capacity in wind, solar, and hydro.

Personally I don't think in the medium to medium - long term developing home grown renewables wiill be any more expensive than relying on increasingly scarce fossil fuels which will have to be imported.

Factor in our currency going down the $hitter and it is a no brainer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Personally I don't think in the medium to medium - long term developing home grown renewables wiill be any more expensive than relying on increasingly scarce fossil fuels which will have to be imported.

We have lots of fossil fuels remember. Maggie took the very intelligent decision to conserve them when it was cheaper to buy other peoples. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We have lots of fossil fuels remember. Maggie took the very intelligent decision to conserve them when it was cheaper to buy other peoples. :)

Are you being sarcastic?

We didnt buy other peoples - we pissed all our gas and oil reserves up the wall at $20 a barrel. We are now starting the process of buying it back at $60-$147 <_<

The vast majority of the physical coal we still have is 'locked in' in flooded and unstable mine structures. It would take more energy to get to it than would be gained.

Had Maggie had any long term vision she would have done what the Dutch did - limited the output of gas. As a result Holland was a major producer of gas before we were and will continue for long after we have started going cap in hand to the russkies for gas / Australians for coal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Low carbon investment in the form of solar hot water or even a PV panel on every home would reduce the need for power plants and be cheaper.

As a first stage they should've implemented years ago: require new-builds to have such systems. On today's technology, ground-source heat pumps offer an excellent return on capital cost on most sites where you'd be building. For apartment blocks, there should be communal[1] heating/hot water systems powered by both heat pumps and solar panels, which also give good returns.

A bit more enlightened policy could help with some of the more futuristic solutions. Like, bringing down the cost of PV power towards being economically competitive. In fact, today's announcement of feed-in tarriffs[2] for the national grid is the single thing most likely to induce me to buy a house, as it alters the economics of having the freedom to install the things.

[1] that is, communally powered, but individually metered. The apartment I lived in in Germany in 1985/6 had that, and it worked very nicely.

[2] if it turns out to be for real.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As a first stage they should've implemented years ago: require new-builds to have such systems. On today's technology, ground-source heat pumps offer an excellent return on capital cost on most sites where you'd be building. For apartment blocks, there should be communal[1] heating/hot water systems powered by both heat pumps and solar panels, which also give good returns.

Au contraire, our "house building" industry build some of the most efficient hovels in the world.

They were built for shit for brains investors, scammers and loan fiddlers. There are 100,000's of them lying empty, lights (and everything else off) consuming no power whatsoever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8146318.stm

Households which contribute electricity to the National Grid are to receive payments under a new government scheme.

Communities will be encouraged to generate wind, water and solar power, and be paid for how much they produce.

Energy and Climate Change Secretary Ed Miliband said the project would "help create the clean energy of the future".

He denied reports the government's energy strategy would cost each UK family £230 a year but admitted there would be "upward pressures" on prices.

Mr Miliband also told BBC One's The Andrew Marr Show an agreement at the G8 summit that global temperatures should not rise more than 2C above 1900 levels was "very significant", because it meant governments will have to "put offers on the table to reduce their carbon dioxide emissions".

'Feed-in tariffs'

The Sunday Mirror newspaper reported that plans to cut carbon dioxide emissions in the government's Renewable Energy Strategy - due to be unveiled on Wednesday - would mean an average annual increase of £230 on household fuel bills.

Mr Miliband said he did not believe the figure was accurate, but acknowledged that "whatever route we go down", prices were likely to rise.

So he denies it's £230 a year, does that mean it's more like £400+ then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone here know about Sterling Engines?

I saw a TV documentary about four months ago that showed a kit-form the presenter held in his hand.

The heat generated by the palm of his hand was enough to cause the engine to work.

Essentially a Sterling Engine converts temperature differentials into mechanical energy.

I was immediately struck that if that were the case why aren't they in widespread use? They most certainly are in submarines, but why not in common applications - anywhere temperature diferentials can be found.

I figured that perhaps they could be used to make air-coniditioning or domestic heating units more efficient as the could both be used to exploit the difference between inside and outside temperatures.

Can any engineers among you point out a flaw in my thinking or are Sterling Engines the great invention that the VI's in the fossil fuel industry smothered?

Edited by Dave Spart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know members here tend to a well educated bunch but I was wondering how many people know the story of Nikola Tesla?

Tesla was a genuius who invented many of the electro/magnetic devices that made so much of the 20th century's progress possible, including AC power.

I have to confess it was the movie The Prestige that got my interest in Tesla started. Tesla was played by David Bowie.

It seems that Tesla died penniless and alone at a hotel in New York. The CIA ensured to raid the room and confiscate his notebooks.

However some of lost inventions are documented in "Tesla : The Lost Inventions".

The free energy receiver Tesla invented harnessed the energy of cosmic waves - background energy bouncing all about the Universe, lingering after the Big Bang.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I know members here tend to a well educated bunch but I was wondering how many people know the story of Nikola Tesla?

Tesla was a genuius who invented many of the electro/magnetic devices that made so much of the 20th century's progress possible, including AC power.

I have to confess it was the movie The Prestige that got my interest in Tesla started. Tesla was played by David Bowie.

It seems that Tesla died penniless and alone at a hotel in New York. The CIA ensured to raid the room and confiscate his notebooks.

However some of lost inventions are documented in "Tesla : The Lost Inventions".

The free energy receiver Tesla invented harnessed the energy of cosmic waves - background energy bouncing all about the Universe, lingering after the Big Bang.

So what you are saying is that we perhaps do have the technology to get ourselves out of this mess if only the VI would stop enslaving us to oil?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can see a Sterling Engine combined with a reflective dish

to get the idea.

Not in production yet.

30 foot diameter dish produces 30kw!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So what you are saying is that we perhaps do have the technology to get ourselves out of this mess if only the VI would stop enslaving us to oil?

Yes.

"I know you're out there...I can feel you now. I know that you're afraid. You're afraid of us, you're afraid of change...I don't know the future...I didn't come here to tell you how this is going to end, I came here to tell you how this is going to begin. Now, I'm going to hang up this phone, and I'm going to show these people what you don't want them to see. I'm going to show them a world without you...a world without rules and controls, without orders or boundaries. A world...where anything is possible."

Discovering the truth is not enough. Light must be shone upon it, it must be shone from the roof tops, whether it is the Fed accounts, new technology or the ability to fly.

Edited by Dave Spart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   296 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

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.