** The Climate Change Thread **

[Mike Sales]

Any electric equipment that produces solely heat is a waste in my view.

An electric heater, running on an increasing proportion of renewable electricity, should be replaced by what, in your view?

The thread is about climate change?
And still much leccy is basically fossil fuel, with transmission and other wastages.

Running on renewables the effect on climate is much less.
But not zero.
It is difficult to see a way around using some leccy for heat generation, although it remains relatively inefficient.
The nuclear option? I am not avocating it.

There are of course some other ways of generating heat- earth source for example that provide a better return for less power.
Waste industrial heat schemes also work.

And wood! Good old wood! Best not start.

I understand some of my electric is nuclear generated, and I don't think I want to go for a domestic reactor.
I don't have the cash for a heat pump, and there is no handy heat using industry.
I have read somewhat about wood stoves.
Gas does not appeal, for obvious reasons.
I think I will stick with my electric heater, at least a growing proportion comes from renewables, and nuclear!

[mattheus]

Nothing is ever simple.

Another thing I learned recently:
For all the fuss we make about food miles, the energy cost is only around 2% of the total. Most of the energy consumed in the creation of food is when it's cooked*.
And then there's the issue of growing unsuitable foods. Energy costs of Spanish tomatoes for example is a lot less then UK tomatoes mainly because they don't need heated greenhouses.

Yes, there are a lot of counter-intuitive issues - tomatoes are a good one!

I recently found this excellent book which I've learned a lot from:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/How-Bad-are-Ba ... 1846688914
(it's by Mike Berners-Lee - you may recognise the surname ... )


*I feel I ought to point out that I eat bananas and tomatoes without cooking them (-;

[PDQ Mobile]

I understand some of my electric is nuclear generated, and I don't think I want to go for a domestic reactor.
I don't have the cash for a heat pump, and there is no handy heat using industry.
I have read somewhat about wood stoves.
Gas does not appeal, for obvious reasons.
I think I will stick with my electric heater, at least a growing proportion comes from renewables, and nuclear!

I understand.
And for many there is little choice.
The fact remains that the majority of UK generated leccy comes from gas and apart from considerations of how efficient any given appliance is at converting that to heat there will always be significant transmission losses.
Gas used in a modern boiler in the house is perhaps the most efficient option.

My original point was more about the fact that a 2kw water heater or similar is using a deal of power but gives only a bit of heat.Put that same power into a motor and it really does a lot more for one's buck.

Renewables are wonderful. We lag behind on the hydro front though with a mere Gigawatt of installed capacity.
http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk

[roubaixtuesday]

Renewables are wonderful. We lag behind on the hydro front though with a mere Gigawatt of installed capacity.
http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk

Renewables may be wonderful, but there is very little potential for further hydro in the UK. We simply don't have enough land at high enough altitude.

We could perhaps invest heavily to import more from Norway through further interconnectors.

[Mike Sales]

Every morning on my way to pick up the paper I check the wind direction by the clutch of wind turbines I can see. I like to think that they are supplying my electricity.
We have other wind farms and also have solar farms in this area.

[PDQ Mobile]

Renewables are wonderful. We lag behind on the hydro front though with a mere Gigawatt of installed capacity.
http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk

Renewables may be wonderful, but there is very little potential for further hydro in the UK. We simply don't have enough land at high enough altitude.

We could perhaps invest heavily to import more from Norway through further interconnectors.

I fear for once I disagree with you.
There is in Scotland a great deal of potential. And high rainfall!
But a willingness to sacrifice wilderness is an issue and a serious one.
To replace our dependence upon fossil energy will require sacrifice and compromise.

There are however numerous rivers and tidal estuaries in the UK which could be harnessed.
However we will all have to pay a deal more for our leccy from such sources.

As an example, in Tewksbury where the Severn becomes tidal influenced there is an old mill
It's weirs closed and rusted when I was last there. Behind those weirs is the water of an enormous catchment of high rainfall.

[PDQ Mobile]

Every morning on my way to pick up the paper I check the wind direction by the clutch of wind turbines I can see. I like to think that they are supplying my electricity.
We have other wind farms and also have solar farms in this area.

I am the same.
I love to check Gridwatch on a windy day and see 30% and more coming from the wind.
Though I understand that inshore is subject to rigorous scrutiny over landscape and noise issues.
Solar too has become impressive- in summer sunshine.

[Psamathe]

Every morning on my way to pick up the paper I check the wind direction by the clutch of wind turbines I can see. I like to think that they are supplying my electricity.
We have other wind farms and also have solar farms in this area.

Whilst a great supporter of renewables I do think some people use them to justify being energy wasteful.

For example, one family member has an electric car and when they got their electric car they also installed a load of solar panels on their roof. Which sounds great except that they regard the solar panels was providing the energy for the car so they can drive to shops, wiz anywhere and everywhere because they are not burning petrol. I've tried to explain that they should regard the battery car and solar panels as being completely separate and every joule they waste in the car is not "environmentally friendly" as it is energy their solar panels could have put onto the National Grid which means that more carbon has been burnt to generate electricity for others.

Ian

[Mike Sales]

Whilst a great supporter of renewables I do think some people use them to justify being energy wasteful.

Some people may, that surely is a fault of the person, not of renewables.
I like to think that I am frugal, with energy and consumer goods, mean and green.

[Cyril Haearn]

Any electric equipment that produces solely heat is a waste in my view.

An electric heater, running on an increasing proportion of renewable electricity, should be replaced by what, in your view?

Warm clothes

[Cyril Haearn]

The Grauniad reports from Nevada, the weather is often so bad people avoid going out
Poor people die because they cannae thoyle/afford AirCon
Lots more 'development' is going on there despite lack of water

[Stradageek]

I've read lots on this topic and also recently attended a talk by Mike Berners-Lee who does seem to have his head screwed on.

The most telling statistic I've gleaned is that if we use renewables to power everything and ditch both fossil fuels and nuclear altogether, we will need to reduce our overall energy consumption to about 10% of what it is now. Renewables simply cannot produce more than this even with acres of solar panels and wind farms and tidal schemes etc. etc.

This will take time and most importantly, unpopular legislation. So with a world run by self serving, careerist politicians I see little hope.

Which is sad because well insulated zero carbon houses can be built (but will seriously erode property developers profits). We could cycle and walk almost everywhere - if towns were redesigned to eliminate the need for cars. We could stop buying throw away goods but again we would only really do this in meaningful numbers if they were legislated against.

Somewhat depressing.

[Mike Sales]

Any electric equipment that produces solely heat is a waste in my view.

An electric heater, running on an increasing proportion of renewable electricity, should be replaced by what, in your view?

Warm clothes

Not forgetting long, warm underwear. But even dressed like that, with a well insulated house I find I need some heating in winter.

[pwa]

I've read lots on this topic and also recently attended a talk by Mike Berners-Lee who does seem to have his head screwed on.

The most telling statistic I've gleaned is that if we use renewables to power everything and ditch both fossil fuels and nuclear altogether, we will need to reduce our overall energy consumption to about 10% of what it is now. Renewables simply cannot produce more than this even with acres of solar panels and wind farms and tidal schemes etc. etc.

This will take time and most importantly, unpopular legislation. So with a world run by self serving, careerist politicians I see little hope.

Which is sad because well insulated zero carbon houses can be built (but will seriously erode property developers profits). We could cycle and walk almost everywhere - if towns were redesigned to eliminate the need for cars. We could stop buying throw away goods but again we would only really do this in meaningful numbers if they were legislated against.

Somewhat depressing.

A good few years ago I heard somebody say something about new housing and its role in energy conservation. I forget the exact figures, but it was something along the lines of "75% of all the housing that will exist in 2050 has already been built", meaning that the homes we have now will still dominate the housing stock in 2050. Addressing the design of houses yet to be built matters, but improving houses that already exist matters more.

[Stradageek]

I've read lots on this topic and also recently attended a talk by Mike Berners-Lee who does seem to have his head screwed on.

The most telling statistic I've gleaned is that if we use renewables to power everything and ditch both fossil fuels and nuclear altogether, we will need to reduce our overall energy consumption to about 10% of what it is now. Renewables simply cannot produce more than this even with acres of solar panels and wind farms and tidal schemes etc. etc.

This will take time and most importantly, unpopular legislation. So with a world run by self serving, careerist politicians I see little hope.

Which is sad because well insulated zero carbon houses can be built (but will seriously erode property developers profits). We could cycle and walk almost everywhere - if towns were redesigned to eliminate the need for cars. We could stop buying throw away goods but again we would only really do this in meaningful numbers if they were legislated against.

Somewhat depressing.

A good few years ago I heard somebody say something about new housing and its role in energy conservation. I forget the exact figures, but it was something along the lines of "75% of all the housing that will exist in 2050 has already been built", meaning that the homes we have now will still dominate the housing stock in 2050. Addressing the design of houses yet to be built matters, but improving houses that already exist matters more.

Good point, well made