Seasideforever
Well-known member
Anyone got one or had a quote to fit one ?
I still think the most viable thing to do by any government would be to fit solar panels to every building, feeding the electricity into the national grid and then charging the householder a fair amount for their power, as well as taking the profit to cover the cost of the initial installation.
On top of the boiler cost you need your house being mega insulated as the output isn’t enough to heat current houses unless you fit 2 heat pumps !!!
Tidal could be an option, the wind doesn’t always blow and the sun - maybe in Florida. the tide is always there twice a day and we know when and how much water will be available. Hydro-electricity has been around a long time and is a proven technology. You don’t hear it mentioned much maybe it’s too difficult, or there isn’t enough will to give it a decent chance.Not a good idea.
The obvious problem is that solar panels don't work at night and it's hard to store electricity on a large scale, so you'd need 100% backup, presumably gas powered, which is obviously not very efficient.
The wider problem is that solar output is inversely correlated with energy demand, demand being highest on cold winter nights and lowest on hot summer days, thus the energy you're producing is to all intents and purposes useless.
The fundamental problem is that because renewables are high capital cost/low operating cost, they're in direct competition with nuclear, which shares the same economic model as renewables but doesn't have the downside of intermittency, thus if you go heavy on renewables you're displacing nuclear and because you need 100% gas fired backup you're actually increasing CO2 emissions by going down this route (which of course is what we're doing).
You're probably better off with solar thermal or ground source heat pumps to generate hot water and reduce electricity demand, because this can be stored at least short term, but again you have the seasonality problem.
Fitted a hydro power station on the river near us in 2017.Tidal could be an option, the wind doesn’t always blow and the sun - maybe in Florida. the tide is always there twice a day and we know when and how much water will be available. Hydro-electricity has been around a long time and is a proven technology. You don’t hear it mentioned much maybe it’s too difficult, or there isn’t enough will to give it a decent chance.
Tidal could be an option, the wind doesn’t always blow and the sun - maybe in Florida. the tide is always there twice a day and we know when and how much water will be available. Hydro-electricity has been around a long time and is a proven technology. You don’t hear it mentioned much maybe it’s too difficult, or there isn’t enough will to give it a decent chance.
Storage of power and transmission is still an issue but technology continues to move along so yes for now we need gas, coal or nuclear options alongside to fill the gaps. This should be seen purely as back up and all national efforts should be on how to increase our renewables and a clear annual goal to reduce the back up (which can reduce once we can sort out storage more efficiently).
Good postYou can't use nuclear to fill the gaps, the economics only make sense if you're running them full time.
This is the big problem with wind power, because it shares the same basic economics with nuclear they're in direct competition with each other so you can either have one or the other, in fact this is the paradox of wind, because it needs 100% coal/gas backup it actually increases CO2 emissions, because when the wind isn't blowing you're burning gas instead of splitting atoms.
Until we've got electricity storage sorted out there really isn't a place for renewables and this rush towards wind power is a huge mistake IMO.
There's some truth in that too. We have to do something though, but I'm far from convinced we as a country won't get fleeced by various unscrupulous companies & their cronies who again will get rich, without achieving very much.Takes loads of electricity to run if it’s cold. You can’t change hydrothermal tech yet. All a Load of nonsense. The world is going to tie itself in knots with all this green energy malarkey. Its all just give and take and eventually a very expensive exercise to appease.
I think the idea is - according to His Borisness - that as manufacture increases, unit retail prices come down, a la mobile phones and microwave ovens.On today's BBC Breakfast about them who in their right mind is going to pay upward of 13k+ for the system even with a 5k government grant and only to save around £150 a year off your normal heating bill?
We all want to do our bit for the environment but the price needs to come way way down or the grant increased until the majority move over to it.
Making it compulsive in new builds would be a start.
So the well off who can afford the system and the massive difference in cost, get a 5k government grant off the total and the rest of us peasants have to wait until it potentially comes down in price bonkers.I think the idea is - according to His Borisness - that as manufacture increases, unit retail prices come down, a la mobile phones and microwave ovens.
I think that's it, yes.So the well off who can afford the system and the massive difference in cost, get a 5k government grant off the total and the rest of us peasants have to wait until it potentially comes down in price bonkers.
The problem with tidal is the environmental cost. There's long been talk of a combined bridge/tidal barrage on Morecambe bay but it would totally change/destroy the ecosystem of the bay.Tidal could be an option, the wind doesn’t always blow and the sun - maybe in Florida. the tide is always there twice a day and we know when and how much water will be available. Hydro-electricity has been around a long time and is a proven technology. You don’t hear it mentioned much maybe it’s too difficult, or there isn’t enough will to give it a decent chance.
£3.99.Anyone got one or had a quote to fit one ?
Good point. I think the Ribble estuary is a better bet.The problem with tidal is the environmental cost. There's long been talk of a combined bridge/tidal barrage on Morecambe bay but it would totally change/destroy the ecosystem of the bay.
It's a catch 22 in some ways. Save the environment by destroying the environment.
I don't know. I do think partly best solution is to use less energy but now my wood stove is really bad and I got it so I could use less gas and stuff.