UK energy

[[XAP]Bob]

The biggest "poverty carrot" is that councils should be actively upgrading social housing to have heat pumps, and adding PV to the roof (council retain ownership, and the profits from export, with tenants benefitting from daylight).

I'd be taxing sales and installation of combustion based boilers, water heaters, cookers, heaters, stoves - with that tax increasing year on year.

There is always going to be a "just missed out" section of the population - need to make sure it isn't those at the very bottom of the ladder again and again. The grant scheme was a good "first mover" incentive, but it is fairly blunt... it needs to be tightened up over the next few years, with more assistance for those who can't afford an upgrade (particularly those whose boilers need replacing).

[Biospace]

The biggest "poverty carrot" is that councils should be actively upgrading social housing to have heat pumps, and adding PV to the roof (council retain ownership, and the profits from export, with tenants benefitting from daylight).

I'd be taxing sales and installation of combustion based boilers, water heaters, cookers, heaters, stoves - with that tax increasing year on year.

There is always going to be a "just missed out" section of the population - need to make sure it isn't those at the very bottom of the ladder again and again. The grant scheme was a good "first mover" incentive, but it is fairly blunt... it needs to be tightened up over the next few years, with more assistance for those who can't afford an upgrade (particularly those whose boilers need replacing).

But before heat pumps can be installed, properties must be absolutely dry and well insulated. In situations where boilers were new or recent installations, wouldn't it make sense to let them run their (relatively short, nowadays) life, using far less energy and allowing heat pump technology, installation expertise and price to improve?

Taxing domestic gas cookers would be interesting, since they're most often used in the evenings when marginal Grid supply is almost always created by burning fossil fuel - perhaps leave this sort of stick until turning on an electric oven in the evening will tap into an excess of renewable or non-FF energy? The authorities could be made to look a little daft and quickly turn public opinion against this sort of thing.

I wonder what will happen in business kitchens, where I think gas is almost universally used? This item caught my eye yesterday, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65328579

[al_yrpal]

Yeah, get yourself a free or highly subsidised 'green' vehicle and heating system and pull up the ladder on everyone else....nice!

Al

[pete75]

What would be your suggestion for carrot and stick applied to those people with virtually zero assets ?
Such people are probably already consuming less energy ( due to poverty) than more affluent people who can afford the heat pump and upgrade required in your energy utopia.
.

Surely it's the ones with near-zero income as well as assets that we need to worry about. Othors have already posted good ideas.

And your carrot and stick for those people?

This is Britain. Do you really think "those people" will actually receive help that goes much beyond fine words?

[[XAP]Bob]

The biggest "poverty carrot" is that councils should be actively upgrading social housing to have heat pumps, and adding PV to the roof (council retain ownership, and the profits from export, with tenants benefitting from daylight).

I'd be taxing sales and installation of combustion based boilers, water heaters, cookers, heaters, stoves - with that tax increasing year on year.

There is always going to be a "just missed out" section of the population - need to make sure it isn't those at the very bottom of the ladder again and again. The grant scheme was a good "first mover" incentive, but it is fairly blunt... it needs to be tightened up over the next few years, with more assistance for those who can't afford an upgrade (particularly those whose boilers need replacing).

But before heat pumps can be installed, properties must be absolutely dry and well insulated. In situations where boilers were new or recent installations, wouldn't it make sense to let them run their (relatively short, nowadays) life, using far less energy and allowing heat pump technology, installation expertise and price to improve?

Taxing domestic gas cookers would be interesting, since they're most often used in the evenings when marginal Grid supply is almost always created by burning fossil fuel - perhaps leave this sort of stick until turning on an electric oven in the evening will tap into an excess of renewable or non-FF energy? The authorities could be made to look a little daft and quickly turn public opinion against this sort of thing.

I wonder what will happen in business kitchens, where I think gas is almost universally used? This item caught my eye yesterday, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65328579

FUD - heat pumps work in all houses. they don't need the house to be "perfectly dry" whatever that means, or "well insulated". They provide heat... if you insulate then you'll reduce the size of the heat pump required, and that's the reason it should be done first - to avoid short cycling a now oversized pump.

An induction cooker is more than twice as efficient as a gas cooker, so you're moving the burning of gas from inside people's houses to power stations. It makes no significant difference in terms of overall emissions, but is a win for air quality in houses, and a win for safety in houses.

Commercial kitchens use induction as well, because it's also very well controlled - it's also *much* easier to keep properly clean. Of course there are a few styles of cooking for which an induction hob isn't great, traditional wok cooking comes to mind, but there is no requirement to ban gas in commercial kitchens, just to disincentivise it's use. At home we've used a flat bottomed wok for years to great effect (I used to have a round based traditional wok, don't miss it).

[[XAP]Bob]

Yeah, get yourself a free or highly subsidised 'green' vehicle and heating system and pull up the ladder on everyone else....nice!

Al

Not managed either of those - I have a leased vehicle which is paid for using a non means tested benefit (and therefore costs about the same as my old, owned, car used to).
I still have a gas boiler, though this winter I also installed a storage heater in my office, which has substantially reduced my gas usage.

I'm not proposing "pulling the ladder up", I'm proposing targeting the somewhat limited resources of government. One of the advantages of having a large scale deployment in social housing is the resultant increase in skilled tradespeople and supply chains, which will benefit everyone. I don't particularly see why I should get the same financial support as someone who earns less in a year than I pay in tax. I also don't see why anyone should get paid to replace a brand new boiler.

[ANTONISH]

This is Britain. Do you really think "those people" will actually receive help that goes much beyond fine words?

No

[Biospace]

FUD - heat pumps work in all houses. they don't need the house to be "perfectly dry" whatever that means, or "well insulated".

Heat pumps work in all houses in the same way they'd work in a castle without a roof, I must remember to word comments more carefully. It's ironic that those with damp, poorly insulated houses will often be those least able to afford the multiple/massive heat pumps which would be needed to heat them well. Damp wicks the heat out of a building like few realise.

We don't notice that many cars are very poorly insulated because there is plenty of waste heat from an internal combustion engine, but the manufacturers make sure their EVs are packed with insulation to minimise the energy used, given the already poor performance of batteries in cold weather.

[pete75]

Yeah, get yourself a free or highly subsidised 'green' vehicle and heating system and pull up the ladder on everyone else....nice!

Al

Not managed either of those - I have a leased vehicle which is paid for using a non means tested benefit (and therefore costs about the same as my old, owned, car used to).
I still have a gas boiler, though this winter I also installed a storage heater in my office, which has substantially reduced my gas usage.

I'm not proposing "pulling the ladder up", I'm proposing targeting the somewhat limited resources of government. One of the advantages of having a large scale deployment in social housing is the resultant increase in skilled tradespeople and supply chains, which will benefit everyone. I don't particularly see why I should get the same financial support as someone who earns less in a year than I pay in tax. I also don't see why anyone should get paid to replace a brand new boiler.

In which case it is free - you're not paying for it, the taxpayer is.

[[XAP]Bob]

Yeah, get yourself a free or highly subsidised 'green' vehicle and heating system and pull up the ladder on everyone else....nice!

Not managed either of those - I have a leased vehicle which is paid for using a non means tested benefit (and therefore costs about the same as my old, owned, car used to).

In which case it is free - you're not paying for it, the taxpayer is.

It's not free. I spend real money that I would otherwise be able to spend on something else - the fact that that money doesn't come to me as cash in a brown envelope each Friday doesn't make it "not money".
However the scheme is exceptionally good value - but there is no question of "pulling the ladder up", which is what I was accused of.

[[XAP]Bob]

FUD - heat pumps work in all houses. they don't need the house to be "perfectly dry" whatever that means, or "well insulated".

Heat pumps work in all houses in the same way they'd work in a castle without a roof, I must remember to word comments more carefully. It's ironic that those with damp, poorly insulated houses will often be those least able to afford the multiple/massive heat pumps which would be needed to heat them well. Damp wicks the heat out of a building like few realise.

And boilers suffer exactly the same...
A heat pump is a just a device which supplies heat.

It doesn't matter what the source of heat is, you'll lose it just the same.
Hence the rest of the paragraph which you selectively quoted:

If you insulate then you'll reduce the size of the heat pump required, and that's the reason it should be done first - to avoid short cycling a now oversized pump.

And of course the whole point was that those least able to afford such improvements should be supported in doing so - that starts with social housing, it doesn't end there, but it would be a significant help to those genuinely least able to afford the change.

But don't worry - clearly science based discussions on this forum are a complete waste of time.

[pete75]

Not managed either of those - I have a leased vehicle which is paid for using a non means tested benefit (and therefore costs about the same as my old, owned, car used to).

In which case it is free - you're not paying for it, the taxpayer is.

It's not free. I spend real money that I would otherwise be able to spend on something else - the fact that that money doesn't come to me as cash in a brown envelope each Friday doesn't make it "not money".
However the scheme is exceptionally good value - but there is no question of "pulling the ladder up", which is what I was accused of.

Nobody's saying it's not money, but it's money given to you by the state , hence free.

[[XAP]Bob]

So nurses have everything for free?
And pensioners have everything for free?

That's not how money works.

[pete75]

So nurses have everything for free?
And pensioners have everything for free?

That's not how money works.

No nurses are paid for doing a job, quite a hard job too. State pension is earned through paying contributions. Most benefits are not earned though. Obviously people need these benefits in order to live, so it's a good thing they're there.

If you get a car entirely funded by the taxpayer then it's a free car and Al is not wrong.

[[XAP]Bob]

My car isn't funded by the taxpayer, it's funded by me.
That funding happens to use part of my PIP, but the funding comes from me even if not through my bank account.

Your assertion was that money coming from the government makes anything paid for free, so yes - pensioners get everything for free, because the basic state pension isn't dependant on contributions. And nurses also get everything for free, because the government gives them that money, albeit in exchange for an absurd amount of skilled labour.

Would you think any differently if motability had a DD from my bank account?