- Joined
- 17 May 2012
- Messages
- 10,819
- Reaction score
- 859
- Country
That might be, but that doesn't mean it's a bad idea to insulate.
No real alternatives to fossil fuels ..
- Thread starter gasbanni
- Start date
That might be, but that doesn't mean it's a bad idea to insulate.
Sponsored Links
- Joined
- 22 Aug 2006
- Messages
- 5,794
- Reaction score
- 707
- Country
So what?
Spending billions on apps that don't work and on chummy Tory friends for PPE that is useless, would be better spent insulating UK homes. If we are going to spaff it up the wall, let us do it wisely.
Good job there are plans to install carbon capture in the Humber region (including Drax) for all major industrial sources then.
Also, why would burning coal in a power staion help to heat homes that use gas? All it would do would be to increase global warming even more.
And we would likely have to import the coal at great expense.
To address the issue of heating homes, there are also plans to inject hydrogen into the gas network, to lower the carbon footprint of our boilers.
Last edited:
Sponsored Links
No probs, all sorted. We'll be plugging into nuclear fusion soon.
Five sites shortlisted for £222m fusion reactor project | Construction News
Five sites shortlisted for £222m fusion reactor project | Construction News
Apparently the government is to announce a 5 grand subsidy to any one who replaces a gas boiler with a leccy heat pump
It will probably end up as a turkey most of these government backed schemes do
by the time admin pencil pushers get there snouts in the trough and the endless paper work / red tape is filled in
It will probably end up as a turkey most of these government backed schemes do
by the time admin pencil pushers get there snouts in the trough and the endless paper work / red tape is filled in
Yes, purely from a world perspective, this would be a very big positive. Humankind, no matter how 'green' we try to be, can only ever have a negative impact on the planet. Yes this impact might lessen as the years/decades go by if current activities decrease, but overall our impact is negative.
Actually, although there are many decent people in the world, I sometimes think with all socioeconomic, cultural, religious and other issues going on in the world, it would be a positive all round if we vanished overnight, all of us, every single one of us. Gone.
There, I've cheered everyone up
Nuclear power is the safest energy source we have.
There is no reason why nuclear power plants can't be the size of a pair of semis, except the will to do it. They fit em in subs ok. There are security 'dirty bomb' risks etc, but hey ho.
Added to which, we need to realise that if we are to save the planet, we may have to pay 10 or 50 times what we pay now for energy. And adjust the economy to make it work. Or make it all free at the point of use, and tax massively to state run/oversee the infrastructure.
MOD has been managing nuclear reactors for decades and the Old Naval College Greenwich had a mini reactor for research and training purposes for many years. These could be installed nationwide to add to the UK energy mix relatively quickly.
and greenest too.
What coal fired power stations might those be, we don't have many left and no volume coal production left, to speak of.
- Joined
- 22 Aug 2006
- Messages
- 5,794
- Reaction score
- 707
- Country
I thought nuke too, but apart from the myriad problems, renewables are cheaper now.
Sub reactors are very expensive, but size isn't very important for normal use.
Big wind turbines are quite good. Wind is more reliable offshore but they obvs cost more.
Look up perovskite panels, they should be a few times better than we have now.
Solar reflectors, onto generating panels, may get used. Maybe not in the UK so much!
Sub reactors are very expensive, but size isn't very important for normal use.
Big wind turbines are quite good. Wind is more reliable offshore but they obvs cost more.
Look up perovskite panels, they should be a few times better than we have now.
Solar reflectors, onto generating panels, may get used. Maybe not in the UK so much!
Last edited:
The issue may well be these air source heat pumps in commercial buildings
schools in particular for hot water ?
they will have to use immersion heaters during the day ? or part of the day
afaik ashp will not get the water to the required temperature ?
than there is cooking on gas , will that get banned as well ?
schools in particular for hot water ?
they will have to use immersion heaters during the day ? or part of the day
afaik ashp will not get the water to the required temperature ?
than there is cooking on gas , will that get banned as well ?
- Joined
- 22 Aug 2006
- Messages
- 5,794
- Reaction score
- 707
- Country
ASHP may be easier to get into commercial buildings, but a lot of them already have aircon so some is there.
I did check some numbers. There are lots on hmg site. Hot water is a small fraction of heating, and commercial is a small fraction of domestic. So not so much to win there.
afaik ashp will not get the water to the required temperature ?
I keep on about Zeolite, plant. You make the stuff wet (zorb it) and it gets hot like 70°. Then you use low grade heat like solar or ashp to dry it out. Vaillant made a trial design. From memory that was £20k and would suit say a block of flats.
From the numbers I looked at, social housing is something like 20%. Carbon footprint of heating is hard to get to because the electric part is counted in power generation, not domestic heating. It depends what you can do to your house - I've got solid walls... The saving might be of the order of 3% in my estimation, of the country's footprint if we insulated the council houses better. How much would it cost? How much from/for carbon sequestration from power plants? I don't know. and on and on - I don't know. And what would the cost be and how does that compare? I don't know. I have looked several up but I'm too old to remember them for long.
These things all need to be analysed and quantified WAY before anyone glues themself to a ****ing road. Lots of things seem like they would be a good idea but trotting them out like a 7 year old is dumb.
I did check some numbers. There are lots on hmg site. Hot water is a small fraction of heating, and commercial is a small fraction of domestic. So not so much to win there.
afaik ashp will not get the water to the required temperature ?
I keep on about Zeolite, plant. You make the stuff wet (zorb it) and it gets hot like 70°. Then you use low grade heat like solar or ashp to dry it out. Vaillant made a trial design. From memory that was £20k and would suit say a block of flats.
From the numbers I looked at, social housing is something like 20%. Carbon footprint of heating is hard to get to because the electric part is counted in power generation, not domestic heating. It depends what you can do to your house - I've got solid walls... The saving might be of the order of 3% in my estimation, of the country's footprint if we insulated the council houses better. How much would it cost? How much from/for carbon sequestration from power plants? I don't know. and on and on - I don't know. And what would the cost be and how does that compare? I don't know. I have looked several up but I'm too old to remember them for long.
These things all need to be analysed and quantified WAY before anyone glues themself to a ****ing road. Lots of things seem like they would be a good idea but trotting them out like a 7 year old is dumb.
Sponsored Links