On Mar 12, 8:29*am, harry wrote:

Your combi will start to go wrong in only a few years if you're lucky

Reliable boilers from reliable makers are reliable, whether they're
combis or not. Unreliable boilers are unreliable no matter how simple.
Whilst there obviously is some correlation between complexity and
unreliability, this is far overwhelmed by the differences from their
manufacture.

On Mar 12, 1:55*pm, John Rumm wrote:
On 12/03/2011 08:29, harry wrote:

The crap in your tanks was in the incoming
water. Goes straight into the boiler and helps bugger it up. *The bits

So how do you get a dead pigeon through a 15mm pipe and float vale then?

Angle grinder?

On Mar 12, 8:40*am, harry wrote:
The age of gas is finished.

I have some sympathy with this view, but are you going to nip into
your Tardis and go back to tell Thatcher not to build our energy
generating capacity on gas too? If you follow the web links that TNP
has been posting lately, it's amazing just how much of total grid
output has been coming from gas of late.

If the gas is finished, or if Putin turns the tap off again, not only
will the heating go off, but the lights will too.

Andy Dingley wrote:
On Mar 12, 8:40 am, harry wrote:
The age of gas is finished.

I have some sympathy with this view, but are you going to nip into
your Tardis and go back to tell Thatcher not to build our energy
generating capacity on gas too? If you follow the web links that TNP
has been posting lately, it's amazing just how much of total grid
output has been coming from gas of late.

If the gas is finished, or if Putin turns the tap off again, not only
will the heating go off, but the lights will too.

And you had better hoe that yior electric heating doesn't run on windmills.

Unless you build a month capable thermal store.

In article
,
Andy Dingley wrote:
On Mar 12, 8:40 am, harry wrote:
The age of gas is finished.

I have some sympathy with this view, but are you going to nip into
your Tardis and go back to tell Thatcher not to build our energy
generating capacity on gas too? If you follow the web links that TNP
has been posting lately, it's amazing just how much of total grid
output has been coming from gas of late.

Yup. With our own supplies diminishing. Which would have been better used
for things it does best - like domestic heating etc.

If the gas is finished, or if Putin turns the tap off again, not only
will the heating go off, but the lights will too.

Wonder how long it will take to build up the coal mining industry again?
And of course to persuade anyone to work in them will need very high
wages. Now that the family history of working in mines is gone.

--
*Happiness is seeing your mother-in-law on a milk carton

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article
,
Andy Dingley wrote:
On Mar 12, 8:40 am, harry wrote:
The age of gas is finished.

I have some sympathy with this view, but are you going to nip into
your Tardis and go back to tell Thatcher not to build our energy
generating capacity on gas too? If you follow the web links that TNP
has been posting lately, it's amazing just how much of total grid
output has been coming from gas of late.

Yup. With our own supplies diminishing. Which would have been better used
for things it does best - like domestic heating etc.


Sadly its also the best fast start backup technology for power
generation, apart from hydro.

Arguable electricity is the best technical solution to home heating.

The only issue is poor thermal efficiencies at the power stations.


If the gas is finished, or if Putin turns the tap off again, not only
will the heating go off, but the lights will too.

Wonder how long it will take to build up the coal mining industry again?
And of course to persuade anyone to work in them will need very high
wages. Now that the family history of working in mines is gone.

On Mar 12, 3:39*pm, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

Arguable electricity is the best technical solution to home heating.

"Electricity" is never a "solution" to anything. Electricity needs to
be generated, so the only solution can be an overall view of
electricity, its generation, transmission and use.

Now comparing the relative efficiencies of electricity generation from
gas + long distance grids to piping gas for heating in the home more
directly is left as an exercise for the reader.

Andy Dingley wrote:
On Mar 12, 3:39 pm, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

Arguable electricity is the best technical solution to home heating.

"Electricity" is never a "solution" to anything.

Oh don't be silly.

AT THE HOUSE electricity is the smallest lowest capital cost and mots
efficient heating source of anything,.

You might as well say 'hot water is no solution to central heating.

Electricity needs to
be generated,

Really!? Go on, astound me more!

so the only solution can be an overall view of
electricity, its generation, transmission and use.


Sure, and carbon free electricity at modest capital cost and hifgh
reliability is easily achieved

Now comparing the relative efficiencies of electricity generation from
gas + long distance grids to piping gas for heating in the home more
directly is left as an exercise for the reader.

Who is talking *gas* generation for home heating?

John Rumm wrote:
On 12/03/2011 14:49, Andy Dingley wrote:
On Mar 12, 10:30 am, "Dave Plowman
wrote:
combis are the way to go.

Maybe if you don't have a bath.

Rubbish, and has been for decades.

We're running what might be the world's oldest Worcester Bosch combi
(there's a plaque on it from the Newcomen Society) and that fills a
bath just fine. Sure, the first combis had capacity problems that made
them a problem for filling baths, but that's way in the past now.

The usual problem is people buying on price and installers under
speccing them.

Calculate what e.g. a 500 mains pressure liter tank fitted with twin
22mm feeds to two baths can do in terms of hot water flow rate: then
calculate how big a combi you need to match it.

Now calculate which costs more, and takes more space...and will be less
efficient as a central heating machined because its wildly over specced
for that purpose.

Combis are, basically, rubbish. Any attempt to make them work
adequately, makes them bigger, more expensive, and less efficient than a
system boiler + PHW tank..

Triffid wrote:


I accept that there are pros and cons for both systems.

All the 'con' is in the combi.

The only thing going is that they are cheap as long as you can handle a
thin trickle of hot water to one hot tap or shower at a time.

John Rumm wrote:
On 12/03/2011 15:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article
,
Andy Dingley wrote:
On Mar 12, 8:40 am, harry wrote:
The age of gas is finished.

I have some sympathy with this view, but are you going to nip into
your Tardis and go back to tell Thatcher not to build our energy
generating capacity on gas too? If you follow the web links that TNP
has been posting lately, it's amazing just how much of total grid
output has been coming from gas of late.

Yup. With our own supplies diminishing. Which would have been better
used
for things it does best - like domestic heating etc.

Sadly its also the best fast start backup technology for power
generation, apart from hydro.

Arguable electricity is the best technical solution to home heating.

The only issue is poor thermal efficiencies at the power stations.

One interesting avenue for improving that:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/03...cient_gennies/


Rather scary temperatures and pressures in that.

Mind you *any* form of large power or large energy storage is pretty scary.

Now how about that pint sized, sealed for 30 years life, home nuclear
CHP reactor.. :-)

Any excess heat is pumped into the ground in summer, to make sure you
have a good 'battery' for the winer heat pump..

On 12/03/11 09:38, John Stumbles wrote:


Unfortunately when some of these items fail they can, in extreme cases,
reduce the safety of the unvented cylinder. Like nuclear power plants
these are normally quite safe ...




unless it's installed in an earthquake zone

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12720219

-

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Triffid wrote:


I accept that there are pros and cons for both systems.

All the 'con' is in the combi.

The only thing going is that they are cheap as long as you can handle
a thin trickle of hot water to one hot tap or shower at a time.

I'm sorry but that is utter nonsense in relation to modern combis.

--
Triff

On Mar 12, 2:56*pm, Andy Dingley wrote:
On Mar 12, 8:40*am, harry wrote:

The age of gas is finished.

I have some sympathy with this view, but are you going to nip into
your Tardis and go back to tell Thatcher not to build our energy
generating capacity on gas too? * If you follow the web links that TNP
has been posting lately, it's amazing just how much of total grid
output has been coming from gas of late.

If the gas is finished, or if Putin turns the tap off again, not only
will the heating go off, but the lights will too.

Nuclear is the only way unfortunately. Just hope that fusion can be
made to work.

In article , John Stumbles
writes
On Fri, 11 Mar 2011 22:29:59 +0000, John wrote:

Lucky you - although the Combi at the Scout Hut provides adequate heat
to the radiators, it fails to give anything other than tepid water out
of the taps event when it is turned up to max and the taps down to the
lowest flow that triggers the boiler.

That's called a fault.

I am going to have a look at the diverter valve


--
John Alexander,

Remove NOSPAM if replying by e-mail

harry wrote:
On Mar 12, 2:56 pm, Andy Dingley wrote:
On Mar 12, 8:40 am, harry wrote:

The age of gas is finished.
I have some sympathy with this view, but are you going to nip into
your Tardis and go back to tell Thatcher not to build our energy
generating capacity on gas too? If you follow the web links that TNP
has been posting lately, it's amazing just how much of total grid
output has been coming from gas of late.

If the gas is finished, or if Putin turns the tap off again, not only
will the heating go off, but the lights will too.

Nuclear is the only way unfortunately. Just hope that fusion can be
made to work.

Haven't they been saying "Give us twenty years and we'll have fusion
working" since the 60s?

Although someone did publish an account recently of a fusion reactor
that broke even on energy production for a few seconds.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

Triffid wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Triffid wrote:


I accept that there are pros and cons for both systems.

All the 'con' is in the combi.

The only thing going is that they are cheap as long as you can handle
a thin trickle of hot water to one hot tap or shower at a time.

I'm sorry but that is utter nonsense in relation to modern combis.

Not in the context I said it. Either the combi is massively overspecced
for CH use, or its massively underpsecced for HW.
If its IS over specced, then its no longer small or cheap.

harry wrote:
On Mar 12, 2:56 pm, Andy Dingley wrote:
On Mar 12, 8:40 am, harry wrote:

The age of gas is finished.
I have some sympathy with this view, but are you going to nip into
your Tardis and go back to tell Thatcher not to build our energy
generating capacity on gas too? If you follow the web links that TNP
has been posting lately, it's amazing just how much of total grid
output has been coming from gas of late.

If the gas is finished, or if Putin turns the tap off again, not only
will the heating go off, but the lights will too.

Nuclear is the only way unfortunately. Just hope that fusion can be
made to work.

I think the thorium amplifier may be 2030s technology: fusion I fear
will not be viable in my lifetime.

On 12 Mar 2011 10:01:29 GMT, Huge wrote:

On 2011-03-12, John Stumbles wrote:

Religion is like a penis. It is fine to have one. It's ok to be proud of
it.
Just don't wave it around in public or try to jam it down my child's
throat.

Brilliant.

Yes! I sthe vatican aware of this - it's obviously aware of "...suffer
little children..."?
--
Peter.
The gods will stay away
whilst religions hold sway

In article
ps.com, Andy Dingley scribeth thus
On Mar 12, 8:40*am, harry wrote:
The age of gas is finished.

I have some sympathy with this view, but are you going to nip into
your Tardis and go back to tell Thatcher not to build our energy
generating capacity on gas too? If you follow the web links that TNP
has been posting lately, it's amazing just how much of total grid
output has been coming from gas of late.

If the gas is finished, or if Putin turns the tap off again, not only
will the heating go off, but the lights will too.

I'm quite surprised that a fuel like Gas is being used up much faster
than what it ought be whereas coal is plentyfuel..
--
Tony Sayer

John Williamson wrote:
harry wrote:
On Mar 12, 2:56 pm, Andy Dingley wrote:
On Mar 12, 8:40 am, harry wrote:

The age of gas is finished.
I have some sympathy with this view, but are you going to nip into
your Tardis and go back to tell Thatcher not to build our energy
generating capacity on gas too? If you follow the web links that TNP
has been posting lately, it's amazing just how much of total grid
output has been coming from gas of late.

If the gas is finished, or if Putin turns the tap off again, not only
will the heating go off, but the lights will too.

Nuclear is the only way unfortunately. Just hope that fusion can be
made to work.

Haven't they been saying "Give us twenty years and we'll have fusion
working" since the 60s?

Although someone did publish an account recently of a fusion reactor
that broke even on energy production for a few seconds.

Oh yes, they got that far. But containment is the practical problem that
is really hard to fix.

It may be possible one say with fast action computing controlling a
magnetic bottle, or perhaps we will find an impulse type reactor where
we just need to contain it for a few ms at a time, and run the thing in
pulses...or maybe something no one has thought of will completely change
everything.

But these are all maybes.

The practical reality is probably boring old PWR now, thorium and pebble
bed, and/or breeder or other tuned up fission in the next 30 years, and
after that maybe fusion or even more advanced fission reactors.

There are many areas that need exploring, once the granting agencies
love affair with 'renewables' finally turns to divorce..

In article , John Williamson johnwilli
scribeth thus
harry wrote:
On Mar 12, 2:56 pm, Andy Dingley wrote:
On Mar 12, 8:40 am, harry wrote:

The age of gas is finished.
I have some sympathy with this view, but are you going to nip into
your Tardis and go back to tell Thatcher not to build our energy
generating capacity on gas too? If you follow the web links that TNP
has been posting lately, it's amazing just how much of total grid
output has been coming from gas of late.

If the gas is finished, or if Putin turns the tap off again, not only
will the heating go off, but the lights will too.

Nuclear is the only way unfortunately. Just hope that fusion can be
made to work.

Haven't they been saying "Give us twenty years and we'll have fusion
working" since the 60s?

Although someone did publish an account recently of a fusion reactor
that broke even on energy production for a few seconds.


Well fusion "works" just we don't use 'em as much as we used to;!..
--
Tony Sayer

In article , The Natural Philosopher
scribeth thus
harry wrote:
On Mar 12, 2:56 pm, Andy Dingley wrote:
On Mar 12, 8:40 am, harry wrote:

The age of gas is finished.
I have some sympathy with this view, but are you going to nip into
your Tardis and go back to tell Thatcher not to build our energy
generating capacity on gas too? If you follow the web links that TNP
has been posting lately, it's amazing just how much of total grid
output has been coming from gas of late.

If the gas is finished, or if Putin turns the tap off again, not only
will the heating go off, but the lights will too.

Nuclear is the only way unfortunately. Just hope that fusion can be
made to work.

I think the thorium amplifier may be 2030s technology: fusion I fear
will not be viable in my lifetime.

Well as your such a wise olde sage perhaps not;-!....
--
Tony Sayer

In article , Triffid
scribeth thus
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Triffid wrote:
Maybe if you don't have a bath.

Our WB 30CDi has a flow-rate of 13.1 litres per minute at 35 deg.
temperature rise. It only takes a little longer to fill the bath than
our old conventional system did (and you can keep 'topping up' with
hot water all night long if you wish - no need to wait for the tank
to heat up again.

It depends on many variables. There are header tank systems around
with not enough head - but round here the mains flow rate is poorer
than some.

I can't see why you'd want to top up a bath anyway if it's filled
with the temperature you want to start with. But even if you did, any
decent storage system should be able to. With a fast recovery
cylinder your boiler can heat the water nearly as fast as a combi
does.

Basically, no instant water heating system can cope with the possible
*peak* load/flow in the average house. A storage system can.

I accept that there are pros and cons for both systems. And whilst a combi
system may suit one household - it may not suit another.

All I can do is repeat that it is now three years since we switched from a
storage system to a combi - and we have had no problems and no regrets. But
there are only two of us in the house - and only the one bathroom.


So no teenage daughters then;?...

Methinks you'd change your mind if you did!...
--
Tony Sayer

tony sayer ) wibbled on Saturday 12 March 2011 18:59:

In article
ps.com, Andy Dingley scribeth thus
On Mar 12, 8:40 am, harry wrote:
The age of gas is finished.

I have some sympathy with this view, but are you going to nip into
your Tardis and go back to tell Thatcher not to build our energy
generating capacity on gas too? If you follow the web links that TNP
has been posting lately, it's amazing just how much of total grid
output has been coming from gas of late.

If the gas is finished, or if Putin turns the tap off again, not only
will the heating go off, but the lights will too.

I'm quite surprised that a fuel like Gas is being used up much faster
than what it ought be whereas coal is plentyfuel..

It is something to do with the previous previous government being a bunch of
dogmatic *******s and for reasons I do not fully understand, they did
something that made burning gas look attractive to the buyers of the
nationalised CEGB.

Possibly connected to mad bitch Maggie's hatred of the coal industry,
whereas at the time, we had plenty of gas.

--
Tim Watts

In article , Tim Watts
scribeth thus
tony sayer ) wibbled on Saturday 12 March 2011 18:59:

In article
ps.com, Andy Dingley scribeth thus
On Mar 12, 8:40 am, harry wrote:
The age of gas is finished.

I have some sympathy with this view, but are you going to nip into
your Tardis and go back to tell Thatcher not to build our energy
generating capacity on gas too? If you follow the web links that TNP
has been posting lately, it's amazing just how much of total grid
output has been coming from gas of late.

If the gas is finished, or if Putin turns the tap off again, not only
will the heating go off, but the lights will too.

I'm quite surprised that a fuel like Gas is being used up much faster
than what it ought be whereas coal is plentyfuel..

It is something to do with the previous previous government being a bunch of
dogmatic *******s and for reasons I do not fully understand, they did
something that made burning gas look attractive to the buyers of the
nationalised CEGB.

Possibly connected to mad bitch Maggie's hatred of the coal industry,
whereas at the time, we had plenty of gas.


Then was then and yesterdays politicos we need ones for the current
situation!..

And who know what there're doing..

Perhaps thats not gonnna happen then...
--
Tony Sayer

tony sayer wrote:
In article
ps.com, Andy Dingley scribeth thus
On Mar 12, 8:40 am, harry wrote:
The age of gas is finished.
I have some sympathy with this view, but are you going to nip into
your Tardis and go back to tell Thatcher not to build our energy
generating capacity on gas too? If you follow the web links that TNP
has been posting lately, it's amazing just how much of total grid
output has been coming from gas of late.

If the gas is finished, or if Putin turns the tap off again, not only
will the heating go off, but the lights will too.

I'm quite surprised that a fuel like Gas is being used up much faster
than what it ought be whereas coal is plentyfuel..

Why?

compare the gas drilling industry to the coal mining industry..and all
is revealed.

Tim Watts wrote:
tony sayer ) wibbled on Saturday 12 March 2011 18:59:

In article
ps.com, Andy Dingley scribeth thus
On Mar 12, 8:40 am, harry wrote:
The age of gas is finished.
I have some sympathy with this view, but are you going to nip into
your Tardis and go back to tell Thatcher not to build our energy
generating capacity on gas too? If you follow the web links that TNP
has been posting lately, it's amazing just how much of total grid
output has been coming from gas of late.

If the gas is finished, or if Putin turns the tap off again, not only
will the heating go off, but the lights will too.
I'm quite surprised that a fuel like Gas is being used up much faster
than what it ought be whereas coal is plentyfuel..

It is something to do with the previous previous government being a bunch of
dogmatic *******s and for reasons I do not fully understand, they did
something that made burning gas look attractive to the buyers of the
nationalised CEGB.

Possibly connected to mad bitch Maggie's hatred of the coal industry,
whereas at the time, we had plenty of gas.

Nope, more to do with the Bitch Maggie having public opinion on her side
hating the coal miners UNION.

We have the same problem ow with the public sector,. but Cameron is
forced to sit on the fence there, and as everyone knows, it takes a man
with no balls to do that successfully.

On 12/03/2011 18:48, John Williamson wrote:
harry wrote:
On Mar 12, 2:56 pm, Andy Dingley wrote:
On Mar 12, 8:40 am, harry wrote:

The age of gas is finished.
I have some sympathy with this view, but are you going to nip into
your Tardis and go back to tell Thatcher not to build our energy
generating capacity on gas too? If you follow the web links that TNP
has been posting lately, it's amazing just how much of total grid
output has been coming from gas of late.

If the gas is finished, or if Putin turns the tap off again, not
only stories about a breakthrough
will the heating go off, but the lights will too.

Nuclear is the only way unfortunately. Just hope that fusion can be
made to work.

Haven't they been saying "Give us twenty years and we'll have fusion
working" since the 60s?

Although someone did publish an account recently of a fusion reactor
that broke even on energy production for a few seconds.

Well!!!!!!! scientists have been talking about that for years. I seem to
remember newspapers being very excited by the so called fantastic
breakthrough by British scientists in the early 1950s or was it late
40s, *FUSION* free energy for evermore!!!!!!!!. We are still waiting.
I blame our politicians from both sides of the political arena who have
been concentrating on reducing CO2 -Bah. Instead of concentrating on
long term security of energy supplies for the UK, their decisions have
put in jeopardy the future of Britain.The French have been happily
building Nuclear and making sure that their main transport systems
(rail) run on electricity generation. The French have always put their
country first. I only wish our politicians had the same goal. Probably
too late now, the good times when money was flowing are over.
Don

On Mar 12, 6:59*pm, tony sayer wrote:
In article
ps.com, Andy Dingley scribeth thus

On Mar 12, 8:40 am, harry wrote:
The age of gas is finished.

I have some sympathy with this view, but are you going to nip into
your Tardis and go back to tell Thatcher not to build our energy
generating capacity on gas too? * If you follow the web links that TNP
has been posting lately, it's amazing just how much of total grid
output has been coming from gas of late.

If the gas is finished, or if Putin turns the tap off again, not only
will the heating go off, but the lights will too.

I'm quite surprised that a fuel like Gas is being used up much faster
than what it ought be whereas coal is plentyfuel..
--
Tony Sayer

Gas power stations are much cheaper to build than any other sort.
No boilers etc. just a gas turbine. They can be quickly started too in
an emergency. (Thought this is undesireable)

Huge wrote:
On 2011-03-12, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

The practical reality is probably boring old PWR now, thorium and pebble
bed, and/or breeder or other tuned up fission in the next 30 years,

But not on fault lines.

Probably there also.

probably over 10,000 people have died in Japan. Only two so far in a
direct nuclear incident, and those not from radiation. And that because
two backup diesel generators failed, on an obsolescent design..


That's pretty damned good, actually.

With refineries and gas/oil storage destroyed and on fire, those nukes
are all that's likely to be working.

Windmills would have been dead in the water.

harry wrote:
On Mar 12, 6:59 pm, tony sayer wrote:
In article
ps.com, Andy Dingley scribeth thus

On Mar 12, 8:40 am, harry wrote:
The age of gas is finished.
I have some sympathy with this view, but are you going to nip into
your Tardis and go back to tell Thatcher not to build our energy
generating capacity on gas too? If you follow the web links that TNP
has been posting lately, it's amazing just how much of total grid
output has been coming from gas of late.
If the gas is finished, or if Putin turns the tap off again, not only
will the heating go off, but the lights will too.
I'm quite surprised that a fuel like Gas is being used up much faster
than what it ought be whereas coal is plentyfuel..
--
Tony Sayer

Gas power stations are much cheaper to build than any other sort.
No boilers etc. just a gas turbine. They can be quickly started too in
an emergency. (Thought this is undesireable)

Wrong on both counts. CCGT sets do have a boiler and a steam turbine on
the back and are in fact designed as fast start emergency backup as well
as continuous operation.

In article , The Natural Philosopher
scribeth thus
harry wrote:
On Mar 12, 6:59 pm, tony sayer wrote:
In article
ps.com, Andy Dingley scribeth thus

On Mar 12, 8:40 am, harry wrote:
The age of gas is finished.
I have some sympathy with this view, but are you going to nip into
your Tardis and go back to tell Thatcher not to build our energy
generating capacity on gas too? If you follow the web links that TNP
has been posting lately, it's amazing just how much of total grid
output has been coming from gas of late.
If the gas is finished, or if Putin turns the tap off again, not only
will the heating go off, but the lights will too.
I'm quite surprised that a fuel like Gas is being used up much faster
than what it ought be whereas coal is plentyfuel..
--
Tony Sayer

Gas power stations are much cheaper to build than any other sort.
No boilers etc. just a gas turbine. They can be quickly started too in
an emergency. (Thought this is undesireable)

Wrong on both counts. CCGT sets do have a boiler and a steam turbine on
the back and are in fact designed as fast start emergency backup as well
as continuous operation.

All as maybe.. but the Gas now is coming from the other side of the
channel, the coal is here under our feet....
--
Tony Sayer

tony sayer wrote:
In article , The Natural Philosopher
scribeth thus
harry wrote:
On Mar 12, 6:59 pm, tony sayer wrote:
In article
ps.com, Andy Dingley scribeth thus

On Mar 12, 8:40 am, harry wrote:
The age of gas is finished.
I have some sympathy with this view, but are you going to nip into
your Tardis and go back to tell Thatcher not to build our energy
generating capacity on gas too? If you follow the web links that TNP
has been posting lately, it's amazing just how much of total grid
output has been coming from gas of late.
If the gas is finished, or if Putin turns the tap off again, not only
will the heating go off, but the lights will too.
I'm quite surprised that a fuel like Gas is being used up much faster
than what it ought be whereas coal is plentyfuel..
--
Tony Sayer
Gas power stations are much cheaper to build than any other sort.
No boilers etc. just a gas turbine. They can be quickly started too in
an emergency. (Thought this is undesireable)
Wrong on both counts. CCGT sets do have a boiler and a steam turbine on
the back and are in fact designed as fast start emergency backup as well
as continuous operation.

All as maybe.. but the Gas now is coming from the other side of the
channel, the coal is here under our feet....

And, according to what I've been told by people who should know, because
of the way the pits were closed, it will not be economically accessible
at any time in the foreseeable future.

The pits round here were closed with what was then a couple of centuries
of accessible reserves, but which is now totally unusable due to tunnel
collapses and the possibility of digging a bit too far and letting water
in with a head of a thousand feet or more from a tunnel they don't know
about.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

tony sayer wrote:
In article , The Natural Philosopher
scribeth thus
harry wrote:
On Mar 12, 6:59 pm, tony sayer wrote:
In article
ps.com, Andy Dingley scribeth thus

On Mar 12, 8:40 am, harry wrote:
The age of gas is finished.
I have some sympathy with this view, but are you going to nip into
your Tardis and go back to tell Thatcher not to build our energy
generating capacity on gas too? If you follow the web links that TNP
has been posting lately, it's amazing just how much of total grid
output has been coming from gas of late.
If the gas is finished, or if Putin turns the tap off again, not only
will the heating go off, but the lights will too.
I'm quite surprised that a fuel like Gas is being used up much faster
than what it ought be whereas coal is plentyfuel..
--
Tony Sayer
Gas power stations are much cheaper to build than any other sort.
No boilers etc. just a gas turbine. They can be quickly started too in
an emergency. (Thought this is undesireable)
Wrong on both counts. CCGT sets do have a boiler and a steam turbine on
the back and are in fact designed as fast start emergency backup as well
as continuous operation.

All as maybe.. but the Gas now is coming from the other side of the
channel, the coal is here under our feet....

Well time to get digging then, Tony. :-)

John Williamson wrote:
tony sayer wrote:
In article , The Natural Philosopher
scribeth thus
harry wrote:
On Mar 12, 6:59 pm, tony sayer wrote:
In article

ps.com, Andy Dingley scribeth thus

On Mar 12, 8:40 am, harry wrote:
The age of gas is finished.
I have some sympathy with this view, but are you going to nip into
your Tardis and go back to tell Thatcher not to build our energy
generating capacity on gas too? If you follow the web links that
TNP
has been posting lately, it's amazing just how much of total grid
output has been coming from gas of late.
If the gas is finished, or if Putin turns the tap off again, not only
will the heating go off, but the lights will too.
I'm quite surprised that a fuel like Gas is being used up much faster
than what it ought be whereas coal is plentyfuel..
--
Tony Sayer
Gas power stations are much cheaper to build than any other sort.
No boilers etc. just a gas turbine. They can be quickly started too in
an emergency. (Thought this is undesireable)
Wrong on both counts. CCGT sets do have a boiler and a steam turbine
on the back and are in fact designed as fast start emergency backup
as well as continuous operation.

All as maybe.. but the Gas now is coming from the other side of the
channel, the coal is here under our feet....

And, according to what I've been told by people who should know, because
of the way the pits were closed, it will not be economically accessible
at any time in the foreseeable future.

The pits round here were closed with what was then a couple of centuries
of accessible reserves, but which is now totally unusable due to tunnel
collapses and the possibility of digging a bit too far and letting water
in with a head of a thousand feet or more from a tunnel they don't know
about.

Yes. In california they are now trying to reopen a neodymium mine. It
will take TWO YEARS to pump the water out first..

Thats the trouble with relatively inaccessible reserves. Cost of extraction.

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
John Williamson wrote:
tony sayer wrote:
In article , The Natural Philosopher
scribeth thus
harry wrote:
On Mar 12, 6:59 pm, tony sayer wrote:
In article

ps.com, Andy Dingley scribeth thus

On Mar 12, 8:40 am, harry wrote:
The age of gas is finished.
I have some sympathy with this view, but are you going to nip into
your Tardis and go back to tell Thatcher not to build our energy
generating capacity on gas too? If you follow the web links
that TNP
has been posting lately, it's amazing just how much of total grid
output has been coming from gas of late.
If the gas is finished, or if Putin turns the tap off again, not
only
will the heating go off, but the lights will too.
I'm quite surprised that a fuel like Gas is being used up much faster
than what it ought be whereas coal is plentyfuel..
--
Tony Sayer
Gas power stations are much cheaper to build than any other sort.
No boilers etc. just a gas turbine. They can be quickly started too in
an emergency. (Thought this is undesireable)
Wrong on both counts. CCGT sets do have a boiler and a steam turbine
on the back and are in fact designed as fast start emergency backup
as well as continuous operation.

All as maybe.. but the Gas now is coming from the other side of the
channel, the coal is here under our feet....

And, according to what I've been told by people who should know,
because of the way the pits were closed, it will not be economically
accessible at any time in the foreseeable future.

The pits round here were closed with what was then a couple of
centuries of accessible reserves, but which is now totally unusable
due to tunnel collapses and the possibility of digging a bit too far
and letting water in with a head of a thousand feet or more from a
tunnel they don't know about.

Yes. In california they are now trying to reopen a neodymium mine. It
will take TWO YEARS to pump the water out first..

Thats the trouble with relatively inaccessible reserves. Cost of
extraction.

The problem in the UK generally is that when they closed the mines, they
turned off the pumps. Which meant they couldn't maintain the tunnels, so
they collapsed, and are still collapsing, which means the water *can't*
be pumped out.

Keeping an open mine clear of excessive water and maintaining it is
(relatively) easy. Even maintaining a mine for a decade or two is cheap
compared with the cost of trying to re-open it.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

In article ,
John Rumm wrote:
The only thing going is that they are cheap as long as you can handle
a thin trickle of hot water to one hot tap or shower at a time.

I'm sorry but that is utter nonsense in relation to modern combis.

Alas in this area TNP is no different from Dribble - both true
believers, and neither is going to let inconvenient facts get in the way
of their dogma.

I'd like to hear of a combi which can fill a bath as quickly as two 3/4"
taps, one of which is supplying water at 60C, and the other cold. And feed
another hot tap or two in the house at the same time.

The thing with a storage system is you can design it to do near enough
what you want - assuming you can site the header tank reasonably. Any
instant system has practical limits.

--
*Some people are alive only because it's illegal to kill them *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

All as maybe.. but the Gas now is coming from the other side of the
channel, the coal is here under our feet....

And, according to what I've been told by people who should know, because
of the way the pits were closed, it will not be economically accessible
at any time in the foreseeable future.

The pits round here were closed with what was then a couple of centuries
of accessible reserves, but which is now totally unusable due to tunnel
collapses and the possibility of digging a bit too far and letting water
in with a head of a thousand feet or more from a tunnel they don't know
about.


All of what we have?..
--
Tony Sayer

In article , The Natural Philosopher
scribeth thus
tony sayer wrote:
In article , The Natural Philosopher
scribeth thus
harry wrote:
On Mar 12, 6:59 pm, tony sayer wrote:
In article
ps.com, Andy Dingley scribeth thus

On Mar 12, 8:40 am, harry wrote:
The age of gas is finished.
I have some sympathy with this view, but are you going to nip into
your Tardis and go back to tell Thatcher not to build our energy
generating capacity on gas too? If you follow the web links that TNP
has been posting lately, it's amazing just how much of total grid
output has been coming from gas of late.
If the gas is finished, or if Putin turns the tap off again, not only
will the heating go off, but the lights will too.
I'm quite surprised that a fuel like Gas is being used up much faster
than what it ought be whereas coal is plentyfuel..
--
Tony Sayer
Gas power stations are much cheaper to build than any other sort.
No boilers etc. just a gas turbine. They can be quickly started too in
an emergency. (Thought this is undesireable)
Wrong on both counts. CCGT sets do have a boiler and a steam turbine on
the back and are in fact designed as fast start emergency backup as well
as continuous operation.

All as maybe.. but the Gas now is coming from the other side of the
channel, the coal is here under our feet....

Well time to get digging then, Tony. :-)



My backs killing me today as it does most days err .. so perhaps not;!..
--
Tony Sayer