On 2007-10-17 08:04:11 +0100, Eeyore
said:

Waiting for the case to be 'compelling' (i.e when energy costs become
crippling) is
likely to mean plenty of people won't bother with a sensible level of
insulation.

Then it is not worth doing until the case is compelling and will happen
by virtue of the market.


Building regulations exist for the thermal performance of NEW homes.

That's fine as long as it doesn't increase the cost.

I have no
problem seeing why at least some expectation of reasonable performance
shouldn't be
made of older ones, especially if accompanied by grants to help..

Of limited value. On older properties with 230mm solid walls, a very
large proportion of total heat produced goes out through the walls.
There is very little that can reasonably be done about that.


I'd rather see public money spent on reduction of energy use than
tokenist 'green
generation'.

I would rather see a decline in "public money" and for individuals to
make their own arrangements as they choose.

I agree with you regarding most "green generation"

The better solutions would be to address generation by investment in
nuclear capacity rather than to cripple economic development via
foolhardy exercises having minimal effect.



I'm sorry, but with the average IQ at 100, most people simply aren't
smart enough to
behave in their own best interests much of the time.

That is their choice

You would apparently have the
idiots hold sway.

Idiots, some people may be, perhaps we should remove their vote also.

I've seem the idiots in action and I don't want any part of it.

Graham