Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, Riedquat said:

I suppose it could be seen like that (and I do get fed up with people who use every individual weather event as proof of climate change - individual ones mean nothing, even though overall increases in them mean something). It was just a throwaway comment.

No worries. Thing is precipitation falls as snow or hail when the air temperature is below zero, generally. It doesn't matter how far below zero so colder temperatures don't automatically mean more snow. Furthermore you need evaporation off the ocean and land to get the moisture in the air on the first place, which happens more at higher temperatures. So counter-intuitively lower temperatures can lead to less snow.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 89
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

6 hours ago, Bruce Banner said:

That's never going to fly.

Telling people they can't sell their houses without first spending thousands would be about the only thing that would get the general public on the streets.

Agreed - no chance this happens in any way similar to what the article says. You can't force people to spend tens of thousands of pounds that they don't have.

The issue with heat pumps is that you really need very good insulation to make them viable, and is costly. Same problem with switching to electric boilers, becuase if you don't have good insulation then your heating costs (relative to gas) are going to triple.

This government has shown almost no interest in incentivising domestic energy consumption improvements. They got rid of decent solar feed in tariffs, so solar panels don't make any financial sense now, and their most recent voucher scheme is has so many criteria, and is so badly run, that it is nothing more than a headline generating exercise. If the government was in any way serious (and they should be), then there is any number of things they could do - e.g. just drop VAT on insulation upgrades. The truth is that for most people, the cost of serious insulation upgrades on older houses, once you've grabbed the low-hanging fruit, is too high. For us, we'd be looking at 40 years payback (£20k upgrade, £500 p.a. saving). Until it makes financial sense, people aren't going to do it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Riedquat said:

She's a weird one (along with most who even vaguely align with her).

Dont stop em making deepfake porn of her though, "if there's grass on Pitch........."

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, markyh said:

Dont stop em making deepfake porn of her though, "if there's grass on Pitch........."

I didn't want to know that. Doesn't surprise me in the least (sadly I'd be more surprised if it hadn't happened), but even so... As much as I can't stand her that's just not right.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, longgone said:

The solution to climate change is to live in the uk during summer then fly off to the southern hemisphere in winter, thus limiting boiler usage. 

 

Or get an modern efficient house. Out house was built in 2009, Modern detached Brick and block high quality, amazing insulation.  Pretty much gas heating goes "off" from end of April until end of October, the house easily maintains a passive 20 degrees. November to April thermostat is set upstairs and downstairs to 20 degrees, and heating is set to come on from 5am to midnight. 

Hot water side is always on but used less in summer due to solar panels. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, markyh said:

Or get an modern efficient house. Out house was built in 2009, Modern detached Brick and block high quality, amazing insulation.  Pretty much gas heating goes "off" from end of April until end of October, the house easily maintains a passive 20 degrees. November to April thermostat is set upstairs and downstairs to 20 degrees, and heating is set to come on from 5am to midnight. 

Hot water side is always on but used less in summer due to solar panels. 

That's not saying much, the boiler's hardly ever on over that period (hot water notwithstanding) in my 19th century stone house with an awkward to insulate part of the rood I've not got insulated yet either. It might not be a constant 20 degrees but it's warm enough then.

I sometimes wonder how much heating is due to people expecting to wander around in shorts and t-shirt all year. Easier to insulate myself with a woolly jumper.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Riedquat said:

That's not saying much, the boiler's hardly ever on over that period (hot water notwithstanding) in my 19th century stone house with an awkward to insulate part of the rood I've not got insulated yet either. It might not be a constant 20 degrees but it's warm enough then.

I sometimes wonder how much heating is due to people expecting to wander around in shorts and t-shirt all year. Easier to insulate myself with a woolly jumper.

Back in 1970, the average temperature of a home in the UK in the winter months was around 12°C. Now, decades later, this has moved all the way up to between 17°C and 23°C.

https://www.ovoenergy.com/guides/energy-guides/average-room-temperature.html#:~:text=Back in 1970%2C the average,C and 23°C.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Riedquat said:

That's not saying much, the boiler's hardly ever on over that period (hot water notwithstanding) in my 19th century stone house with an awkward to insulate part of the rood I've not got insulated yet either. It might not be a constant 20 degrees but it's warm enough then.

Same in my place, a crappy 60's bungalow. Some of the real "eco" houses now don't need heating at all, even in the UK. I'm not sure I'd want to go that far (not sure how living in a house with no ventilation would actually feel), but I'd like to have a place that requires very little heating by the time I retire. Realistically, that means a new build (self build, if I could find the plot). Bringing existing stock to anything near new build eco levels is prohibitively expensive, and ultimately still not as good.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Riedquat said:

That's not saying much, the boiler's hardly ever on over that period (hot water notwithstanding) in my 19th century stone house with an awkward to insulate part of the rood I've not got insulated yet either. It might not be a constant 20 degrees but it's warm enough then.

I sometimes wonder how much heating is due to people expecting to wander around in shorts and t-shirt all year. Easier to insulate myself with a woolly jumper.

People do do that. Mate of mine used to work in a house of a (now deceased) pop star. The dude would have the heating on full in a mansion house and used to walk around wearing nothing but a pair of speedo's, those and a massive spliff permanently in his mouth.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Riedquat said:

That's not saying much, the boiler's hardly ever on over that period (hot water notwithstanding) in my 19th century stone house with an awkward to insulate part of the rood I've not got insulated yet either. It might not be a constant 20 degrees but it's warm enough then.

I sometimes wonder how much heating is due to people expecting to wander around in shorts and t-shirt all year. Easier to insulate myself with a woolly jumper.

If we killed 90% of the women, we could 1/2 the worlds heating bills. My missis would have the heating on 25 degrees 24/7 if I would let her, but then she is African and even after 20 years living here, thinks it's freezing any day that isn't 25 degrees C.  

I am always finding the upstairs thermometer in our bedroom nudged up to 23-24 degrees in deep winter, while she watches TV tucked up in bed under a duvet with a single electric blanket her side. 

Me, i'm in my pants alone at this temp!!!  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, markyh said:

If we killed 90% of the women, we could 1/2 the worlds heating bills. My missis would have the heating on 25 degrees 24/7 if I would let her, but then she is African and even after 20 years living here, thinks it's freezing any day that isn't 25 degrees C.  

I am always finding the upstairs thermometer in our bedroom nudged up to 23-24 degrees in deep winter, while she watches TV tucked up in bed under a duvet with a single electric blanket her side. 

Me, i'm in my pants alone at this temp!!!  

Not just women (although it mostly seems to be!) Someone sat near me at work is always complaining about it being freezing in the office whilst I'm sweltering with rolled up shirt sleeves. If you're cold you can always put more clothes on but there are only so many I can take off before being escorted off the premises!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Riedquat said:

Not just women (although it mostly seems to be!) Someone sat near me at work is always complaining about it being freezing in the office whilst I'm sweltering with rolled up shirt sleeves. If you're cold you can always put more clothes on but there are only so many I can take off before being escorted off the premises!

He he, i miss the summer "airconditioning"  wars of the workplace office i used to work at, all the 40+ menapausaul women in accounts one end, wanting it switched off and windows open, and the young sales side, 80% men, wanting if flat out and coming to work in shorts anything over 20 degrees. 

As a Senior Sales Manager, when i was there, fook the oldies, they had to freeze, or as you said, put a bloody jumper cardie on. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, mattyboy1973 said:

Agreed - no chance this happens in any way similar to what the article says. You can't force people to spend tens of thousands of pounds that they don't have.

The issue with heat pumps is that you really need very good insulation to make them viable, and is costly. Same problem with switching to electric boilers, becuase if you don't have good insulation then your heating costs (relative to gas) are going to triple.

This government has shown almost no interest in incentivising domestic energy consumption improvements. They got rid of decent solar feed in tariffs, so solar panels don't make any financial sense now, and their most recent voucher scheme is has so many criteria, and is so badly run, that it is nothing more than a headline generating exercise. If the government was in any way serious (and they should be), then there is any number of things they could do - e.g. just drop VAT on insulation upgrades. The truth is that for most people, the cost of serious insulation upgrades on older houses, once you've grabbed the low-hanging fruit, is too high. For us, we'd be looking at 40 years payback (£20k upgrade, £500 p.a. saving). Until it makes financial sense, people aren't going to do it.

The government can only incentivise people with their own money or even more borrowing.

Maybe it's more honest to scrap all the schemes and tell people that moving to net zero is something we have decided to do and make them aware of how this will affect the price of electricity, gas, petrol etc over the coming years.

They could than take informed decisions about how to spend their money, spend 3 or 4 times as much on the gas bill or do something about their houses energy efficiency.  

This would avoid any need for bans on selling houses as potential buyers would factor the future running costs into their offers.  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, mattyboy1973 said:

 The truth is that for most people, the cost of serious insulation upgrades on older houses, once you've grabbed the low-hanging fruit, is too high. For us, we'd be looking at 40 years payback (£20k upgrade, £500 p.a. saving). Until it makes financial sense, people aren't going to do it.

You need to think outside the box, you are looking at this payback like you have a choice, which you currently do. But what if they make GCHand open fires / wood burning stoves illegal, and you are forced to fit leccy heating, that annually costs 4 x what you pay now to run.

Then hey presto, your payback for insulating the house is only 10 years.  Jobs a goddun. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, markyh said:

You need to think outside the box, you are looking at this payback like you have a choice, which you currently do. But what if they make GCHand open fires / wood burning stoves illegal, and you are forced to fit leccy heating, that annually costs 4 x what you pay now to run.

Then hey presto, your payback for insulating the house is only 10 years.  Jobs a goddun. 

Then I'll settle for setting fire to the people who supported and brought in such a change.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, “Nasty Piece of work” said:

I respectfully suggest against trashing the environment, that isn’t a deal breaker.  See where solar panels were a decade ago, I suspect you will have your sleep.

 

I'm very pro technology being refined to not trash the environment. I do not know just how loud heat pumps are but if they are loud enough to disturb us then it is a deal breaker for me. If they're not, or will not be in the future, wonderful, I look forward it it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Had a heat pump for 10 years now in different houses. TBH the only complaint about noise was when using it as air conditioning since people sit outside in the summer and have their windows and doors open. Modern heat pumps are efficient down to around -20 which is pretty uncommon in blighty. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Riedquat said:

Then I'll settle for setting fire to the people who supported and brought in such a change.

Did you also object to the phasing out of leaded petrol and cheap convenient asbestos wall insulation?

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, markyh said:

You need to think outside the box, you are looking at this payback like you have a choice, which you currently do. But what if they make GCHand open fires / wood burning stoves illegal, and you are forced to fit leccy heating, that annually costs 4 x what you pay now to run.

Then hey presto, your payback for insulating the house is only 10 years.  Jobs a goddun. 

Well, yes - I don't disagree. One way or another, it needs to become financially prudent to "do the right thing", whether that is via the carrot or the stick. The problem is, if they go all stick, then they will plunge a significant percentage of the country into poverty, and that won't end well. Done right, this could be a huge opportunity for jobs, and a big win for our carbon emissions, of which domestic use is a big contributor. Nothing about this government's record suggests that they will make a good job of it, though, although I don't have any particularly bright ideas myself. A carbon tax would probably be a good start.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, mattyboy1973 said:

Well, yes - I don't disagree. One way or another, it needs to become financially prudent to "do the right thing", whether that is via the carrot or the stick. The problem is, if they go all stick, then they will plunge a significant percentage of the country into poverty, and that won't end well. Done right, this could be a huge opportunity for jobs, and a big win for our carbon emissions, of which domestic use is a big contributor. Nothing about this government's record suggests that they will make a good job of it, though, although I don't have any particularly bright ideas myself. A carbon tax would probably be a good start.

 The most efficient way to cut carbon emissions is a cap and trade system and credits system. 

If i build a new home out of wood to sequester carbon and replant those trees then I've sort of done the world a favour so i get a credit, but maybe the cement or steel plant can't actually do without dirty energy for right now so they get a tax bill. Implementation is a faff though. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Si1 said:

Did you also object to the phasing out of leaded petrol and cheap convenient asbestos wall insulation?

I'm trying to think of a non-insulting way that you could regard that as a valid comparison but I've drawn a blank.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, adarmo said:

 The most efficient way to cut carbon emissions is a cap and trade system and credits system. 

If i build a new home out of wood to sequester carbon and replant those trees then I've sort of done the world a favour so i get a credit, but maybe the cement or steel plant can't actually do without dirty energy for right now so they get a tax bill. Implementation is a faff though. 

Cement and concrete production is a very significant carbon producer, one that often gets ignored because it's far easier to whinge about the overall insignificant number of people still fortunate enough to enjoy a pleasant open fire. Got to make the world as souless a place as possible in the name of the Greater Good!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its all a load of tripe, electric cars have a bigger carbon footprint to produce than ICE cars.  They then use power produced from fossil fuels.  Load of nonsense, end goal to get people to buy overpriced crap.   

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • 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.