I moved house and left behind my 4 oven oil fired aga.

The oven in my new house is awful by comparrison so I am considering
another aga.

Does anyone have experience of a new electric aga - the ordinary 13
amp one, not the night storage one?
I have heard mixed reports on their reliability.
Thanks

vbleau wrote:
I moved house and left behind my 4 oven oil fired aga.

The oven in my new house is awful by comparrison so I am considering
another aga.

Does anyone have experience of a new electric aga - the ordinary 13
amp one, not the night storage one?
I have heard mixed reports on their reliability.
Thanks


Dunno what could go WRONG frankly.

The average fuel aga runs at about 600W-1kw 24x7., If that's OK on your
bills, it should be fine..


13A sounds about right..probably toggles a 3KW element on and off.

On Mon, 19 Jan 2009 15:29:55 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

vbleau wrote:

Does anyone have experience of a new electric aga - the ordinary 13
amp one, not the night storage one?
I have heard mixed reports on their reliability.

[snip]

The average fuel aga runs at about 600W-1kw 24x7., If that's OK on your
bills, it should be fine..

The 4 oven electric Aga averages 1,600W/hr continuously (270kW a
week) according to Aga. By buying a £300 add on timer (Aga
Intelligent Management System) this can be reduced to about 1,300W/hr
or a mere 11.4 MWh per year at a cost of about £1,100.

Peter Parry wrote:
On Mon, 19 Jan 2009 15:29:55 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

vbleau wrote:

Does anyone have experience of a new electric aga - the ordinary 13
amp one, not the night storage one?
I have heard mixed reports on their reliability.

[snip]

The average fuel aga runs at about 600W-1kw 24x7., If that's OK on your
bills, it should be fine..

The 4 oven electric Aga averages 1,600W/hr continuously (270kW a
week) according to Aga. By buying a £300 add on timer (Aga
Intelligent Management System) this can be reduced to about 1,300W/hr
or a mere 11.4 MWh per year at a cost of about £1,100.


Apart from the cost, I wonder how much carbon dioxide is emitted?

On Tue, 20 Jan 2009 14:25:12 UTC, Bruce wrote:

Peter Parry wrote:
On Mon, 19 Jan 2009 15:29:55 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

vbleau wrote:

Does anyone have experience of a new electric aga - the ordinary 13
amp one, not the night storage one?
I have heard mixed reports on their reliability.

[snip]

The average fuel aga runs at about 600W-1kw 24x7., If that's OK on your
bills, it should be fine..

The 4 oven electric Aga averages 1,600W/hr continuously (270kW a
week) according to Aga. By buying a £300 add on timer (Aga
Intelligent Management System) this can be reduced to about 1,300W/hr
or a mere 11.4 MWh per year at a cost of about £1,100.

Apart from the cost, I wonder how much carbon dioxide is emitted?

None at all by the Aga! :-)

And possibly none at all at all, if it's powered from nukular...

--
The information contained in this post is copyright the
poster, and specifically may not be published in, or used by
http://www.diybanter.com

On Tue, 20 Jan 2009 14:25:12 +0000, Bruce wrote:

Apart from the cost, I wonder how much carbon dioxide is emitted?

About 6 tonnes, very approximately what would be used by flying to New
Zealand and back once every year.

An electric Aga alone uses roughly the same amount on electricity as
the average American home in total does (11MWh per year - source US
Energy Information Administration, 2006 figure)

If you want an example of creative writing the Aga pages on greenery
are well worth a read. Faced with the problem of a user population
which is sensitive to greenwash but generally not terribly bright
(otherwise they would not have bought an Aga in the first place) it
has come up with some remarkably innovative ideas to paint these
dinosaurs green - such as connecting your own personal rooftop
windmill to the Aga to "store" energy.

http://www.aga-web.co.uk/92_907.htm

"Bob Eager" wrote:
On Tue, 20 Jan 2009 14:25:12 UTC, Bruce wrote:

Peter Parry wrote:
On Mon, 19 Jan 2009 15:29:55 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

vbleau wrote:

Does anyone have experience of a new electric aga - the ordinary 13
amp one, not the night storage one?
I have heard mixed reports on their reliability.

[snip]

The average fuel aga runs at about 600W-1kw 24x7., If that's OK on your
bills, it should be fine..

The 4 oven electric Aga averages 1,600W/hr continuously (270kW a
week) according to Aga. By buying a £300 add on timer (Aga
Intelligent Management System) this can be reduced to about 1,300W/hr
or a mere 11.4 MWh per year at a cost of about £1,100.

Apart from the cost, I wonder how much carbon dioxide is emitted?

None at all by the Aga! :-)

And possibly none at all at all, if it's powered from nukular...


It seems a bit excessive to have a new nuclear power station built
specially to power an Aga. I knew they were incredibly inefficient and
environmentally unfriendly, but are they really that bad? ;-)

In the meantime, the Aga will have to draw its power from the National
Grid. Approximately 80% of the power from the Grid is generated by
fossil fuels (gas and coal) so I repeat, I wonder how much carbon
dioxide is emitted?


[I suppose you are one of those people who think that using an electric
car emits zero carbon!]

On 20 Jan 2009 14:55:22 GMT someone who may be "Bob Eager"
wrote this:-

And possibly none at all at all, if it's powered from nukular...

Nuclear electricity generation emits carbon dioxide, despite claims
to the contrary by the likes of Bernard Ingham. The debate is how
much it emits.

Even if the power station itself emits almost no carbon dioxide,
none of them has a hole in the ground nearby from which fuel rods
can be taken. Rather a lot of stuff has to be mined and separated,
be transported long distances [1] and go through several energy
intensive processes before it is turned into a fuel rod.

If it is to be "reprocessed" then a fuel rod then goes through a
number of energy intensive processes, including producing highly
radioactive nitric acid which must be kept cool using energy
intensive mechanical means in tanks [2] for a long time if it is not
to boil and the tanks possibly explode [3] before it goes through an
energy intensive process to turn it into glass blocks.


[1] no uranium mines in the UK, Australia and Canada are the largest
suppliers and are some way away.

[2] An article in the New Scientist in September 2001 estimated that
an attack on these tanks would release 44 times as much
radioactivity as the 1986 Chernobyl disaster, and would ultimately
cause 1.2 million cancers in Britain and Ireland.

[3] one of the Tomsk-7 explosions illustrated what happens if this
liquid is in an explosion. Fortunately Tomsk-7 is in a remote area.



--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

On 20 Jan 2009 14:55:22 GMT, Bob Eager wrote:

Apart from the cost, I wonder how much carbon dioxide is emitted?

None at all by the Aga! :-)

And possibly none at all at all, if it's powered from nukular...

Or hydro but both are not including the CO2 emmited during construction of
said power plants...

--
Cheers
Dave.

Bruce wrote:
"Bob Eager" wrote:
On Tue, 20 Jan 2009 14:25:12 UTC, Bruce wrote:

Peter Parry wrote:
On Mon, 19 Jan 2009 15:29:55 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

vbleau wrote:
Does anyone have experience of a new electric aga - the ordinary 13
amp one, not the night storage one?
I have heard mixed reports on their reliability.
[snip]

The average fuel aga runs at about 600W-1kw 24x7., If that's OK on your
bills, it should be fine..
The 4 oven electric Aga averages 1,600W/hr continuously (270kW a
week) according to Aga. By buying a £300 add on timer (Aga
Intelligent Management System) this can be reduced to about 1,300W/hr
or a mere 11.4 MWh per year at a cost of about £1,100.
Apart from the cost, I wonder how much carbon dioxide is emitted?
None at all by the Aga! :-)

And possibly none at all at all, if it's powered from nukular...


It seems a bit excessive to have a new nuclear power station built
specially to power an Aga. I knew they were incredibly inefficient and
environmentally unfriendly, but are they really that bad? ;-)

In the meantime, the Aga will have to draw its power from the National
Grid. Approximately 80% of the power from the Grid is generated by
fossil fuels (gas and coal) so I repeat, I wonder how much carbon
dioxide is emitted?


Well; e can look forward to the first pebble bed reactor aga probably.

"Top up with any old radioactive **** once a year, heat your house and
generate your electricity, too.
"
:-)

David Hansen wrote:
On 20 Jan 2009 14:55:22 GMT someone who may be "Bob Eager"
wrote this:-

And possibly none at all at all, if it's powered from nukular...

Nuclear electricity generation emits carbon dioxide, despite claims
to the contrary by the likes of Bernard Ingham. The debate is how
much it emits.

Even if the power station itself emits almost no carbon dioxide,
none of them has a hole in the ground nearby from which fuel rods
can be taken. Rather a lot of stuff has to be mined and separated,
be transported long distances [1] and go through several energy
intensive processes before it is turned into a fuel rod.


Yup. Most of which could use nuclear power to power them.

If it is to be "reprocessed" then a fuel rod then goes through a
number of energy intensive processes, including producing highly
radioactive nitric acid which must be kept cool using energy
intensive mechanical means in tanks [2] for a long time if it is not
to boil and the tanks possibly explode [3] before it goes through an
energy intensive process to turn it into glass blocks.


Yup. All 50 tons a year of them.

Compaed with the HUGELY energy intensive job of setting up and
maintaining the 500,000 tons of windmills they replace?



[1] no uranium mines in the UK, Australia and Canada are the largest
suppliers and are some way away.

[2] An article in the New Scientist in September 2001 estimated that
an attack on these tanks would release 44 times as much
radioactivity as the 1986 Chernobyl disaster, and would ultimately
cause 1.2 million cancers in Britain and Ireland.


New scientist..well what DO you expect.

[3] one of the Tomsk-7 explosions illustrated what happens if this
liquid is in an explosion. Fortunately Tomsk-7 is in a remote area.

Oh dear oh dear. Usual proof by assertion ********.

On Jan 20, 2:18*pm, Peter Parry wrote:
On Mon, 19 Jan 2009 15:29:55 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

vbleau wrote:
Does anyone have * experience of a new electric aga - the ordinary 13
amp one, not the night storage one?
I have heard mixed reports on their reliability.

[snip]

The average fuel aga runs at about 600W-1kw 24x7., If that's OK on your
bills, it should be fine..

The 4 oven electric Aga averages 1,600W/hr continuously *(270kW a
week) according to Aga. *By buying a £300 add on timer (Aga
Intelligent Management System) this can be reduced to about 1,300W/hr
or a mere 11.4 MWh per year at a cost of about £1,100.



To be fair, that heat does heat the house so in winter at least there
is some offset.


Robert

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Bruce wrote:

It seems a bit excessive to have a new nuclear power station built
specially to power an Aga. I knew they were incredibly inefficient and
environmentally unfriendly, but are they really that bad? ;-)

In the meantime, the Aga will have to draw its power from the National
Grid. Approximately 80% of the power from the Grid is generated by
fossil fuels (gas and coal) so I repeat, I wonder how much carbon
dioxide is emitted?


Well; e can look forward to the first pebble bed reactor aga probably.

"Top up with any old radioactive **** once a year, heat your house and
generate your electricity, too.
"
:-)


Added bonus: you and your kids will glow in the dark. ;-)

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
David Hansen wrote:
On 20 Jan 2009 14:55:22 GMT someone who may be "Bob Eager"
wrote this:-

And possibly none at all at all, if it's powered from nukular...

Nuclear electricity generation emits carbon dioxide, despite claims
to the contrary by the likes of Bernard Ingham. The debate is how
much it emits.

Even if the power station itself emits almost no carbon dioxide,
none of them has a hole in the ground nearby from which fuel rods
can be taken. Rather a lot of stuff has to be mined and separated,
be transported long distances [1] and go through several energy
intensive processes before it is turned into a fuel rod.


Yup. Most of which could use nuclear power to power them.

Also worth noting that the quantity of mined uranium required to run a
reactor for a year is probably comparable to what a standard fossil fuel
power station will get through in a matter of days or even hours.


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On 20 Jan, 16:22, RobertL wrote:

To be fair, that heat does heat the house *so in winter at least there
is some offset.

Heating my kitchen (Victorian, rear extension, poor insulation)
wouldn't usefully heat my house.

In article ,
Bruce writes:

It seems a bit excessive to have a new nuclear power station built
specially to power an Aga. I knew they were incredibly inefficient and
environmentally unfriendly, but are they really that bad? ;-)

In the meantime, the Aga will have to draw its power from the National
Grid. Approximately 80% of the power from the Grid is generated by
fossil fuels (gas and coal) so I repeat, I wonder how much carbon
dioxide is emitted?

So you want an aga that takes uranium rods directly.
Mind you, as the dinner turns into carbon, it might
run away and go uncontrolled critical ;-)

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

(Andrew Gabriel) wrote:

So you want an aga that takes uranium rods directly.
Mind you, as the dinner turns into carbon, it might
run away and go uncontrolled critical ;-)


Ah yes, that would be the "Sellafield" brand of cooker.

;-)

Bruce wrote:
(Andrew Gabriel) wrote:
So you want an aga that takes uranium rods directly.
Mind you, as the dinner turns into carbon, it might
run away and go uncontrolled critical ;-)


Ah yes, that would be the "Sellafield" brand of cooker.

;-)

And the huge advantage of stopping much food poisoning in its tracks!
(Assuming it works like the Cobalt irradiation units, and that they
work. Obviously won't help with toxins already produced by the bacteria...)

--
Rod

Hypothyroidism is a seriously debilitating condition with an insidious
onset.
Although common it frequently goes undiagnosed.
www.thyromind.info www.thyroiduk.org www.altsupportthyroid.org

RobertL wrote:
On Jan 20, 2:18 pm, Peter Parry wrote:
On Mon, 19 Jan 2009 15:29:55 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

vbleau wrote:
Does anyone have experience of a new electric aga - the ordinary 13
amp one, not the night storage one?
I have heard mixed reports on their reliability.
[snip]

The average fuel aga runs at about 600W-1kw 24x7., If that's OK on your
bills, it should be fine..
The 4 oven electric Aga averages 1,600W/hr continuously (270kW a
week) according to Aga. By buying a £300 add on timer (Aga
Intelligent Management System) this can be reduced to about 1,300W/hr
or a mere 11.4 MWh per year at a cost of about £1,100.



To be fair, that heat does heat the house so in winter at least there
is some offset.


Robert


And in summer there is the 'negative offset' of running a/c to keep cool
in the kitchen?

--
Rod

Hypothyroidism is a seriously debilitating condition with an insidious
onset.
Although common it frequently goes undiagnosed.
www.thyromind.info www.thyroiduk.org www.altsupportthyroid.org

"John Rumm" wrote in message
et...
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
David Hansen wrote:
On 20 Jan 2009 14:55:22 GMT someone who may be "Bob Eager"
wrote this:-

And possibly none at all at all, if it's powered from nukular...

Nuclear electricity generation emits carbon dioxide, despite claims
to the contrary by the likes of Bernard Ingham. The debate is how
much it emits.

Even if the power station itself emits almost no carbon dioxide,
none of them has a hole in the ground nearby from which fuel rods
can be taken. Rather a lot of stuff has to be mined and separated,
be transported long distances [1] and go through several energy
intensive processes before it is turned into a fuel rod.


Yup. Most of which could use nuclear power to power them.

Also worth noting that the quantity of mined uranium required to run a
reactor for a year is probably comparable to what a standard fossil fuel
power station will get through in a matter of days or even hours.

Where is our coal shipped from these days? China, South America?

Adam

John Rumm wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
David Hansen wrote:
On 20 Jan 2009 14:55:22 GMT someone who may be "Bob Eager"
wrote this:-

And possibly none at all at all, if it's powered from nukular...

Nuclear electricity generation emits carbon dioxide, despite claims
to the contrary by the likes of Bernard Ingham. The debate is how
much it emits.

Even if the power station itself emits almost no carbon dioxide,
none of them has a hole in the ground nearby from which fuel rods
can be taken. Rather a lot of stuff has to be mined and separated,
be transported long distances [1] and go through several energy
intensive processes before it is turned into a fuel rod.


Yup. Most of which could use nuclear power to power them.

Also worth noting that the quantity of mined uranium required to run a
reactor for a year is probably comparable to what a standard fossil fuel
power station will get through in a matter of days or even hours.


The actual tonnage of refined is aroudn 50 tins a year I think.

The raw ore is around 100 times more so 5k tonnes of e.g. yellowcake.

Complicated by fast breeders and recycling of spent rods. Both of which
reduce fuel consumption.

ARWadsworth wrote:
"John Rumm" wrote in message
et...
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
David Hansen wrote:
On 20 Jan 2009 14:55:22 GMT someone who may be "Bob Eager"
wrote this:-

And possibly none at all at all, if it's powered from nukular...
Nuclear electricity generation emits carbon dioxide, despite claims
to the contrary by the likes of Bernard Ingham. The debate is how
much it emits.

Even if the power station itself emits almost no carbon dioxide,
none of them has a hole in the ground nearby from which fuel rods
can be taken. Rather a lot of stuff has to be mined and separated,
be transported long distances [1] and go through several energy
intensive processes before it is turned into a fuel rod.

Yup. Most of which could use nuclear power to power them.
Also worth noting that the quantity of mined uranium required to run a
reactor for a year is probably comparable to what a standard fossil fuel
power station will get through in a matter of days or even hours.

Where is our coal shipped from these days? China, South America?

belgium, poland..

Adam

Rod wrote:
Bruce wrote:
(Andrew Gabriel) wrote:
So you want an aga that takes uranium rods directly.
Mind you, as the dinner turns into carbon, it might
run away and go uncontrolled critical ;-)


Ah yes, that would be the "Sellafield" brand of cooker.

;-)

And the huge advantage of stopping much food poisoning in its tracks!
(Assuming it works like the Cobalt irradiation units, and that they
work. Obviously won't help with toxins already produced by the bacteria...)


I think the food poisoning might be the least of your worries. Far more
worrying is the prospect of the nuclear core melting down and taking up
residence in the basement ...

Bruce wrote:
Rod wrote:
Bruce wrote:
(Andrew Gabriel) wrote:
So you want an aga that takes uranium rods directly.
Mind you, as the dinner turns into carbon, it might
run away and go uncontrolled critical ;-)

Ah yes, that would be the "Sellafield" brand of cooker.

;-)
And the huge advantage of stopping much food poisoning in its tracks!
(Assuming it works like the Cobalt irradiation units, and that they
work. Obviously won't help with toxins already produced by the bacteria...)


I think the food poisoning might be the least of your worries. Far more
worrying is the prospect of the nuclear core melting down and taking up
residence in the basement ...


Ready for the ground source heat pump... :-)

--
Rod

Hypothyroidism is a seriously debilitating condition with an insidious
onset.
Although common it frequently goes undiagnosed.
www.thyromind.info www.thyroiduk.org www.altsupportthyroid.org

Rod wrote:
Bruce wrote:

I think the food poisoning might be the least of your worries. Far more
worrying is the prospect of the nuclear core melting down and taking up
residence in the basement ...


Ready for the ground source heat pump... :-)


There's nothing like positive thinking, is there?

;-)

In article ,
The Natural Philosopher writes:
John Rumm wrote:

Also worth noting that the quantity of mined uranium required to run a
reactor for a year is probably comparable to what a standard fossil fuel
power station will get through in a matter of days or even hours.

The actual tonnage of refined is aroudn 50 tins a year I think.

The raw ore is around 100 times more so 5k tonnes of e.g. yellowcake.

Complicated by fast breeders and recycling of spent rods. Both of which
reduce fuel consumption.

Didcot A burns 3.7MT of coal a year, so to answer John's point,
weight-for-weight, 5k tonnes of fuel would only last it half a day,
whereas 5k tonnes of ore will keep a nuclear power plant going for
a year.

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

Bruce wrote:
Rod wrote:
Bruce wrote:
(Andrew Gabriel) wrote:
So you want an aga that takes uranium rods directly.
Mind you, as the dinner turns into carbon, it might
run away and go uncontrolled critical ;-)

Ah yes, that would be the "Sellafield" brand of cooker.

;-)
And the huge advantage of stopping much food poisoning in its tracks!
(Assuming it works like the Cobalt irradiation units, and that they
work. Obviously won't help with toxins already produced by the bacteria...)


I think the food poisoning might be the least of your worries. Far more
worrying is the prospect of the nuclear core melting down and taking up
residence in the basement ...


cant happen with a pebble bed..

Andrew Gabriel wrote:
In article ,
The Natural Philosopher writes:
John Rumm wrote:
Also worth noting that the quantity of mined uranium required to run a
reactor for a year is probably comparable to what a standard fossil fuel
power station will get through in a matter of days or even hours.

The actual tonnage of refined is aroudn 50 tins a year I think.

The raw ore is around 100 times more so 5k tonnes of e.g. yellowcake.

Complicated by fast breeders and recycling of spent rods. Both of which
reduce fuel consumption.

Didcot A burns 3.7MT of coal a year, so to answer John's point,
weight-for-weight, 5k tonnes of fuel would only last it half a day,
whereas 5k tonnes of ore will keep a nuclear power plant going for
a year.

And didcot produces more radioactive waste that escapes than all the UK
nuclear power industry put together.

Coal ash is quite radioactive, you know.

vbleau wrote:

I moved house and left behind my 4 oven oil fired aga.

Excellent move. If you could arrange for a scrappy to get rid of the
antique pile of crap you'd be heading for the 21st Century, if somewhat
belatedly. But running away from it, as you have, is probably the best
move.

On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 11:21:50 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

Bruce wrote:

I think the food poisoning might be the least of your worries. Far more
worrying is the prospect of the nuclear core melting down and taking up
residence in the basement ...


cant happen with a pebble bed..

While it might not melt out It's not impossible for the bottom to fall
out of a pebble bed reactor.


--

Mike wrote:
On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 11:21:50 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

Bruce wrote:

I think the food poisoning might be the least of your worries. Far more
worrying is the prospect of the nuclear core melting down and taking up
residence in the basement ...


cant happen with a pebble bed..

While it might not melt out It's not impossible for the bottom to fall
out of a pebble bed reactor.


Couldn't help wondering how well it would clear the ice and snow from a
gravel drive? (Just add a proportion of RA pebbles as it's laid.) Or
keep the pond ice-free?

--
Rod

Hypothyroidism is a seriously debilitating condition with an insidious
onset.
Although common it frequently goes undiagnosed.
www.thyromind.info www.thyroiduk.org www.altsupportthyroid.org

On 20 Jan, 16:17, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Bruce wrote:
"Bob Eager" wrote:
On Tue, 20 Jan 2009 14:25:12 UTC, Bruce wrote:

Peter Parry wrote:
On Mon, 19 Jan 2009 15:29:55 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

vbleau wrote:
Does anyone have * experience of a new electric aga - the ordinary 13
amp one, not the night storage one?
I have heard mixed reports on their reliability.
[snip]

The average fuel aga runs at about 600W-1kw 24x7., If that's OK on your
bills, it should be fine..
The 4 oven electric Aga averages 1,600W/hr continuously *(270kW a
week) according to Aga. *By buying a £300 add on timer (Aga
Intelligent Management System) this can be reduced to about 1,300W/hr
or a mere 11.4 MWh per year at a cost of about £1,100.
Apart from the cost, I wonder how much carbon dioxide is emitted?
None at all by the Aga! :-)

And possibly none at all at all, if it's powered from nukular...

It seems a bit excessive to have a new nuclear power station built
specially to power an Aga. *I knew they were incredibly inefficient and
environmentally unfriendly, but are they really that bad? *;-)

In the meantime, the Aga will have to draw its power from the National
Grid. *Approximately 80% of the power from the Grid is generated by
fossil fuels (gas and coal) so I repeat, I wonder how much carbon
dioxide is emitted?

Well; e can look forward to the first pebble bed reactor aga probably.

"Top up with any old radioactive **** once a year, heat your house and
generate your electricity, too.
"
:-)

Well, perhaps the OP should go off to the Kola peninsula to find one
of the abandoned RTGs (radiothermal generators) there. The Gorn (1100
Watt), Senostav (1870 Watt) or IEU-1M (2200 Watt) should keep the Aga
up to temperature, and you get some free electricity thrown in as
well.

http://www.bellona.no/bellona.org/en...ncidents/37598

There's the minor problem of the Strontium-90 and decay products, but
I'm sure the local council would set up a recycling scheme before too
long.

Sid.

Mike wrote:
On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 11:21:50 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

Bruce wrote:

I think the food poisoning might be the least of your worries. Far more
worrying is the prospect of the nuclear core melting down and taking up
residence in the basement ...


cant happen with a pebble bed..

While it might not melt out It's not impossible for the bottom to fall
out of a pebble bed reactor.


Its not impossible for a pebble to fall out of your bottom, either.


Its not impossible that invisible fairies live at the bottom of the
garden either.

OR that your brakes will fail tomorrow.

The world is full of possibility.

The main point about a pebble bed being that in order to get tit to work
AT ALL you need a lot of pebbles, and you need to cool them before they
will start working.

On 21 Jan, 11:29, (Steve Firth) wrote:
vbleau wrote:
I moved house and left behind my 4 oven oil fired aga.

Excellent move. If you could arrange for a scrappy to get rid of the
antique pile of crap you'd be heading for the 21st Century, if somewhat
belatedly. But running away from it, as you have, is probably the best
move.

Perhaps we should be charitable and point out that an electric Aga
should be extremely reliable, as there's very little to go wrong, but
that reliability comes at the cost of, what is regarded by most people
as extremely, large electricity bills. If your disposable income is
high enough not to worry about such things, then that is immaterial.
Most people aren't so lucky.

For the price of a year's worth of electricity to run the Aga, you
could buy a very good fan-assisted electric oven, with change left
over to do the cooking for at least a year. Miele probably make a good
one. You could spend the capital saved in not buying the Aga on some
decent wine to go with the food you cook in the more efficient oven.

I do realise that once you get to a certain level of disposable
income, efficiency is less important than aesthetics and personal
taste. Personally, I wouldn't want a diamond encrusted mobile phone,
or a gold plated Rolls-Royce. Some people do, and the expenditure
doesn't matter to them, so there is a market for such things. Agas are
not diamond encrusted, but they are expensive for what they do. De
gustibus non est disputandum.

Regards,

Sid

wrote:
On 21 Jan, 11:29, (Steve Firth) wrote:
vbleau wrote:
I moved house and left behind my 4 oven oil fired aga.
Excellent move. If you could arrange for a scrappy to get rid of the
antique pile of crap you'd be heading for the 21st Century, if somewhat
belatedly. But running away from it, as you have, is probably the best
move.

Perhaps we should be charitable and point out that an electric Aga
should be extremely reliable, as there's very little to go wrong, but
that reliability comes at the cost of, what is regarded by most people
as extremely, large electricity bills. If your disposable income is
high enough not to worry about such things, then that is immaterial.
Most people aren't so lucky.

For the price of a year's worth of electricity to run the Aga, you
could buy a very good fan-assisted electric oven, with change left
over to do the cooking for at least a year. Miele probably make a good
one. You could spend the capital saved in not buying the Aga on some
decent wine to go with the food you cook in the more efficient oven.

I do realise that once you get to a certain level of disposable
income, efficiency is less important than aesthetics and personal
taste. Personally, I wouldn't want a diamond encrusted mobile phone,
or a gold plated Rolls-Royce. Some people do, and the expenditure
doesn't matter to them, so there is a market for such things. Agas are
not diamond encrusted, but they are expensive for what they do. De
gustibus non est disputandum.

Regards,

Sid

Business opportunity! Could we call it the Aga Khan model?

--
Rod

Hypothyroidism is a seriously debilitating condition with an insidious
onset.
Although common it frequently goes undiagnosed.
www.thyromind.info www.thyroiduk.org www.altsupportthyroid.org

On 23 Jan, 15:22, wrote:
On 21 Jan, 11:29, (Steve Firth) wrote:

vbleau wrote:
I moved house and left behind my 4 oven oil fired aga.

Excellent move. If you could arrange for a scrappy to get rid of the
antique pile of crap you'd be heading for the 21st Century, if somewhat
belatedly. But running away from it, as you have, is probably the best
move.

Perhaps we should be charitable and point out that an electric Aga
should be extremely reliable, as there's very little to go wrong, but
that reliability comes at the cost of, what is regarded by most people
as extremely, large electricity bills. If your disposable income is
high enough not to worry about such things, then that is immaterial.
Most people aren't so lucky.

For the price of a year's worth of electricity to run the Aga, you
could buy a very good fan-assisted electric oven, with change left
over to do the cooking for at least a year. Miele probably make a good
one. You could spend the capital saved in not buying the Aga on some
decent wine to go with the food you cook in the more efficient oven.

I do realise that once you get to a certain level of disposable
income, efficiency is less important than aesthetics and personal
taste. Personally, I wouldn't want a diamond encrusted mobile phone,
or a gold plated Rolls-Royce. Some people do, and the expenditure
doesn't matter to them, so there is a market for such things. Agas are
not diamond encrusted, but they are expensive for what they do. De
gustibus non est disputandum.

Regards,

Sid

Thanks Sid and others .
I have touched on a sore point with many it seems.
Fan oven would be no comparison.
Not sure how diamond encrusted mobiles or Rolls-Royce cars fit in.
Fascinating diversion from the original question but I am going to
repeat it .
Anyone got an electric aga? What do you think of it and have you had
any problems?

On 23 Jan, 15:22, wrote:
On 21 Jan, 11:29, (Steve Firth) wrote:

vbleau wrote:
I moved house and left behind my 4 oven oil fired aga.

Excellent move. If you could arrange for a scrappy to get rid of the
antique pile of crap you'd be heading for the 21st Century, if somewhat
belatedly. But running away from it, as you have, is probably the best
move.

Perhaps we should be charitable and point out that an electric Aga
should be extremely reliable, as there's very little to go wrong, but
that reliability comes at the cost of, what is regarded by most people
as extremely, large electricity bills. If your disposable income is
high enough not to worry about such things, then that is immaterial.
Most people aren't so lucky.

For the price of a year's worth of electricity to run the Aga, you
could buy a very good fan-assisted electric oven, with change left
over to do the cooking for at least a year. Miele probably make a good
one. You could spend the capital saved in not buying the Aga on some
decent wine to go with the food you cook in the more efficient oven.

I do realise that once you get to a certain level of disposable
income, efficiency is less important than aesthetics and personal
taste. Personally, I wouldn't want a diamond encrusted mobile phone,
or a gold plated Rolls-Royce. Some people do, and the expenditure
doesn't matter to them, so there is a market for such things. Agas are
not diamond encrusted, but they are expensive for what they do. De
gustibus non est disputandum.

Regards,

Sid

I intend to buy the oven AND the wine

vbleau wrote:

Not sure how diamond encrusted mobiles or Rolls-Royce cars fit in.


It is called "conspicuous consumption". In your case, it is conspicuous
consumption of electricity.

Don't you feel just a teeny weeny bit guilty about all the CO2 emissions
that will be produced by the power stations that supply the National
Grid, and therefore your grossly inefficient, astonishingly power-hungry
electricity-gobbling monster oven?

There is every reason why you should.

vbleau wrote:
On 23 Jan, 15:22, wrote:
On 21 Jan, 11:29, (Steve Firth) wrote:

vbleau wrote:
I moved house and left behind my 4 oven oil fired aga.
Excellent move. If you could arrange for a scrappy to get rid of the
antique pile of crap you'd be heading for the 21st Century, if somewhat
belatedly. But running away from it, as you have, is probably the best
move.
Perhaps we should be charitable and point out that an electric Aga
should be extremely reliable, as there's very little to go wrong, but
that reliability comes at the cost of, what is regarded by most people
as extremely, large electricity bills. If your disposable income is
high enough not to worry about such things, then that is immaterial.
Most people aren't so lucky.

For the price of a year's worth of electricity to run the Aga, you
could buy a very good fan-assisted electric oven, with change left
over to do the cooking for at least a year. Miele probably make a good
one. You could spend the capital saved in not buying the Aga on some
decent wine to go with the food you cook in the more efficient oven.

I do realise that once you get to a certain level of disposable
income, efficiency is less important than aesthetics and personal
taste. Personally, I wouldn't want a diamond encrusted mobile phone,
or a gold plated Rolls-Royce. Some people do, and the expenditure
doesn't matter to them, so there is a market for such things. Agas are
not diamond encrusted, but they are expensive for what they do. De
gustibus non est disputandum.

Regards,

Sid

Thanks Sid and others .
I have touched on a sore point with many it seems.
Fan oven would be no comparison.
Not sure how diamond encrusted mobiles or Rolls-Royce cars fit in.
Fascinating diversion from the original question but I am going to
repeat it .
Anyone got an electric aga? What do you think of it and have you had
any problems?

These links might, or might not, be of some interest. Note the dates -
prices will be out of date and the views might have changed in response
to that.

http://www.countryliving.co.uk/index.php/chatroom/topic/1248
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=912891

--
Rod

Hypothyroidism is a seriously debilitating condition with an insidious
onset.
Although common it frequently goes undiagnosed.
www.thyromind.info www.thyroiduk.org www.altsupportthyroid.org

On 26 Jan, 22:55, Bruce wrote:
vbleau wrote:

Not sure how *diamond encrusted mobiles or Rolls-Royce cars fit in.

It is called "conspicuous consumption". *In your case, it is conspicuous
consumption of electricity. *

Don't you feel just a teeny weeny bit guilty about all the CO2 emissions
that will be produced by the power stations that supply the National
Grid, and therefore your grossly inefficient, astonishingly power-hungry
electricity-gobbling monster oven? *

There is every reason why you should.

Guilty?No. It is not really an oven it's a radiator that is on all the
time meaning I will switch off most of the ones in my house that are
on all the time currently in my house in a cold part of the world.
Conveniently I will also be able to cook food in it, better than any
of the many ovens I have owned over the years (except my old aga)