On May 25, 10:40*am, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
wrote:
On May 25, 6:42 am, harry wrote:
On May 24, 10:00 pm, "www.GymRatZ.co.uk"

wrote:
On 24/05/2012 21:39, Rod Speed wrote:
And if you want something that really heats the water
properly to high temps, its better to have two separate
systems, one for the electricity and one for the water.
Thanks for input Rod
It all revolves around a proposed extension which will (if given the
go-ahead) give us a 15m long x 2.5m pitched roof with SW elevation.
Given that our house is heated just fine for both UFH and Rad. zones
with max. flow rate of 55 degrees C and we're sort sort of down south
(Bristol latitude) if I could get 55 degrees from such a system for 4
hours of the day in deep winter it _might_ prove to be of significant
benefit by offsetting boiler run/start time into the evening.
Perhaps a summer/winter diverter that could (pre)heat DHW in summer and
CH in winter...
Just foundhttp://www.newformenergy.com/
and bounced them a few questions.
All depends on planning app. at the moment though... (and of course
price of such a hybrid solution)
8¬|
Cheers - Pete
--http://www.GymRatZ.co.uk-Fitness+GymEquipment.
Such a device is pointless. *You don't need any house heating when the
sun is shining. Heat collected in Winter is minimal in the UK climate.
Spend your money on insulation.
Rod is from Oz ergo most of the stuff he rambles on about is
irrelevant here in the UK.http://www.flickr.com/photos/ara-chl...7627608971673/

Whose house is that? It must be like living in a tomb.

Its harries passive haus.

Costs a bomb to build and to misquote Vivian stanshall 'when harry broke
a fast, you cursed double glazing'

It has DIY quadruple glazing actually.

On May 25, 10:58*am, "Rod Speed" wrote:
wrote in message

...





On May 25, 6:42 am, harry wrote:
On May 24, 10:00 pm, "www.GymRatZ.co.uk"

wrote:
On 24/05/2012 21:39, Rod Speed wrote:

And if you want something that really heats the water
properly to high temps, its better to have two separate
systems, one for the electricity and one for the water.

Thanks for input Rod
It all revolves around a proposed extension which will (if given the
go-ahead) give us a 15m long x 2.5m pitched roof with SW elevation.

Given that our house is heated just fine for both UFH and Rad. zones
with max. flow rate of 55 degrees C and we're sort sort of down south
(Bristol latitude) if I could get 55 degrees from such a system for 4
hours of the day in deep winter it _might_ prove to be of significant
benefit by offsetting boiler run/start time into the evening.

Perhaps a summer/winter diverter that could (pre)heat DHW in summer and
CH in winter...

Just foundhttp://www.newformenergy.com/
and bounced them a few questions.

All depends on planning app. at the moment though... (and of course
price of such a hybrid solution)
8¬|

Cheers - Pete
--http://www.GymRatZ.co.uk-Fitness+GymEquipment.

Such a device is pointless. *You don't need any house heating when the
sun is shining. Heat collected in Winter is minimal in the UK climate.
Spend your money on insulation.
Rod is from Oz ergo most of the stuff he rambles on about is
irrelevant here in the UK.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ara-chl...7627608971673/
Whose house is that?

His.

It must be like living in a tomb.

Entirely appropriate given that he has one foot in the grave.

And it's a ****ed passive solar system. The windows are MUCH too
short vertically and there is no eave to stop solar input in summer either.-

Vertically high windoes can't be effectively solar shaded, especially
in far north locations such as ours


Tch Tch. Solar shading is less needed in our climate than yours.
And the house works.
What have you actually achieved?
Show us all the pix or just f***g shut up.

On May 25, 12:03*pm, harry wrote:
On May 25, 10:34*am, " wrote:









On May 25, 6:42*am, harry wrote:

On May 24, 10:00*pm, "www.GymRatZ.co.uk"

wrote:
On 24/05/2012 21:39, Rod Speed wrote:

And if you want something that really heats the water
properly to high temps, its better to have two separate
systems, one for the electricity and one for the water.

Thanks for input Rod
It all revolves around a proposed extension which will (if given the
go-ahead) give us a 15m long x 2.5m pitched roof with SW elevation.

Given that our house is heated just fine for both UFH and Rad. zones
with max. flow rate of 55 degrees C and we're sort sort of down south
(Bristol latitude) if I could get 55 degrees from such a system for 4
hours of the day in deep winter it _might_ prove to be of significant
benefit by offsetting boiler run/start time into the evening.

Perhaps a summer/winter diverter that could (pre)heat DHW in summer and
CH in winter...

Just foundhttp://www.newformenergy.com/
and bounced them a few questions.

All depends on planning app. at the moment though... (and of course
price of such a hybrid solution)
8¬|

Cheers - Pete
--http://www.GymRatZ.co.uk-Fitness+GymEquipment.

Such a device is pointless. *You don't need any house heating when the
sun is shining. Heat collected in Winter is minimal in the UK climate..
Spend your money on insulation.
Rod is from Oz ergo most of the stuff he rambles on about is
irrelevant here in the UK.http://www.flickr.com/photos/ara-chl...7627608971673/

Whose house is that? It must be like living in a tomb.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

It's mine. *Why a tomb? *All the rooms are better lit than most
houses. Half of the walls is glass.

Then the windows must be much bigger than they look in the photos,
they do not look very high. Probably the shutters obscuring half the
glass and the walls being so thick.

Also the inner insulating door, which looks like the blast proof door
on a nuclear bunker.

Philip

On May 25, 1:08*pm, " wrote:
On May 25, 12:03*pm, harry wrote:









On May 25, 10:34*am, " wrote:

On May 25, 6:42*am, harry wrote:

On May 24, 10:00*pm, "www.GymRatZ.co.uk"

wrote:
On 24/05/2012 21:39, Rod Speed wrote:

And if you want something that really heats the water
properly to high temps, its better to have two separate
systems, one for the electricity and one for the water.

Thanks for input Rod
It all revolves around a proposed extension which will (if given the
go-ahead) give us a 15m long x 2.5m pitched roof with SW elevation.

harry wrote:

I am writing a book.


The mind boggles.

You can't even write a usenet post.

--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.

harry wrote:
On May 25, 10:02 am, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
Martin Brown wrote:
On 25/05/2012 09:45,www.GymRatZ.co.ukwrote:
On 25/05/2012 06:42, harry wrote:
Such a device is pointless. You don't need any house heating when the
sun is shining. Heat collected in Winter is minimal in the UK climate.
But if the cooling of the PV increases their output and can provide a
20+ (?) degree temperature rise to pre-heat mains cold water before it
goes through the combi. that could in it's self could make quite a
reduction on gas consumption during summer months for DHW would it not?
(throwing ideas in the air for discussion and dissection)
The problem is one of cost effectiveness and complexity.
There is no point in saving power usage to create vast quantities of
lukewarm water that you don't need in mid-summer if it makes the whole
installation a lot more expensive and prone to failure.
A rough rule of thumb is that summer DHW is less than 10% maybe as low
as 5% of peak winter space heating requirements. We are just too far
north for solar power to be sensible without market distorting FITs.
I calculated that my annual DHW costs are about £100 quid. My annual
heating costs are now getting on for £2000 of which about £1200 is
between November and March. Plus a couple of hundred for wood.

That's on a fully insulated house run as cold as I dare.

--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

My PV array is worth £2200/year to me taking into account tax.
I have no heating bill & my electric bill is around £400.
Not very smart are you?

Very smart Harry, since you could fit your whole house into my kitchen
more or less.


--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.

harry wrote:


It's mine. Why a tomb? All the rooms are better lit than most
houses. Half of the walls is glass.

People who live in glass houses....


--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.

On Fri, 25 May 2012 09:54:14 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

I know of a system with ground source heat pump and solar thermal.
If
the solar thermal gets the store to it's maximum safe temperature
it
dumps the any excess heat into the ground but having thought about
it
that is just a heat sink the heat won't stay there 'till the
winter
to be pumped back out.

That's how heat pumps work - summer heat is stored in the ground over
winter.

Look up soil temperatures even 50cm down varies very little 1m down
is pretty much constant in the UK. If "summer heat" was being stored
down there the tempertaure would rise over the summer. And to store a
significant amount of heat would have to rise quite a bit.

Of course things get complicated when you start pumping the heat out
though as you create a localised artifical temperature gradient but
even so the area of land above a coiled tube based collector isn't
that great so won't receive anything like enough energy to supply
winter space heating requirements, just like some what more effcient
solar thermal collectors can't. And what about bore holes, 30 to 100m
deep?

There might be some contribution from summer heat but not much when
you are pumping 10kWHr+ out of the ground.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On May 25, 9:54*am, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Fri, 25 May 2012 01:22:37 +0100,www.GymRatZ.co.ukwrote:

There is no reason why one couldn't install a larger collector but
what do you do with all that heat in the summer when you have no
space heating requiremen?
Ah well I was also thinking about that one earlier...
The front garden/drive etc could be used as an Interseasonal Thermal
Store.

Do the maths. To store a useful amount of heat you will need a big
store and lots of insulation. When planning the system here I did
half look at how big a store would need to be to supply a days heat.
I think it came out at about 1500l of water at 90C. So to store just
a months worth of heat it's getting a bit big...

I know of a system with ground source heat pump and solar thermal. If
the solar thermal gets the store to it's maximum safe temperature it
dumps the any excess heat into the ground but having thought about it
that is just a heat sink the heat won't stay there 'till the winter
to be pumped back out.

It actually can.

That's how heat pumps work - summer heat is stored in the ground over
winter.

--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Summer heat (renewable) that came from the sun and from rainfall.

Any heat pumped into the ground in summer is long gone by wintertbime.
Reversible heat pumps are not allowed for the RHI incentive for this
reason.

On May 25, 9:56*am, Martin Brown
wrote:
On 25/05/2012 09:45,www.GymRatZ.co.ukwrote:

On 25/05/2012 06:42, harry wrote:

Such a device is pointless. *You don't need any house heating when the
sun is shining. Heat collected in Winter is minimal in the UK climate.

But if the cooling of the PV increases their output and can provide a
20+ (?) degree temperature rise to pre-heat mains cold water before it
goes through the combi. that could in it's self could make quite a
reduction on gas consumption during summer months for DHW would it not?

(throwing ideas in the air for discussion and dissection)

The problem is one of cost effectiveness and complexity.

There is no point in saving power usage to create vast quantities of
lukewarm water that you don't need in mid-summer if it makes the whole
installation a lot more expensive and prone to failure.

A rough rule of thumb is that summer DHW is less than 10% maybe as low
as 5% of peak winter space heating requirements. We are just too far
north for solar power to be sensible without market distorting FITs.

How so?
My PV panels generate more energy then I use. I need no further fuel
purchases for the next 20 odd years. There is no maintenance. It is
a one off expense.
If I bought s diesel generator I would be buying fuel for evermore.

On May 25, 10:40*am, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
wrote:
On May 25, 6:42 am, harry wrote:
On May 24, 10:00 pm, "www.GymRatZ.co.uk"

wrote:
On 24/05/2012 21:39, Rod Speed wrote:
And if you want something that really heats the water
properly to high temps, its better to have two separate
systems, one for the electricity and one for the water.
Thanks for input Rod
It all revolves around a proposed extension which will (if given the
go-ahead) give us a 15m long x 2.5m pitched roof with SW elevation.
Given that our house is heated just fine for both UFH and Rad. zones
with max. flow rate of 55 degrees C and we're sort sort of down south
(Bristol latitude) if I could get 55 degrees from such a system for 4
hours of the day in deep winter it _might_ prove to be of significant
benefit by offsetting boiler run/start time into the evening.
Perhaps a summer/winter diverter that could (pre)heat DHW in summer and
CH in winter...
Just foundhttp://www.newformenergy.com/
and bounced them a few questions.
All depends on planning app. at the moment though... (and of course
price of such a hybrid solution)
8¬|
Cheers - Pete
--http://www.GymRatZ.co.uk-Fitness+GymEquipment.
Such a device is pointless. *You don't need any house heating when the
sun is shining. Heat collected in Winter is minimal in the UK climate.
Spend your money on insulation.
Rod is from Oz ergo most of the stuff he rambles on about is
irrelevant here in the UK.http://www.flickr.com/photos/ara-chl...7627608971673/

Whose house is that? It must be like living in a tomb.

Its harries passive haus.

Costs a bomb to build and to misquote Vivian stanshall 'when harry broke
a fast, you cursed double glazing'

--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You are a financial dunce (as usual). I paid out maybe £6000 for
additional insulation etc.

I needed no gas heating system. Save £3000?
So i have paid out £3000 extra for my house.

How long do you suppose it will take to get that £3000 back?
Less than two years.
I have zero heating bill.
I get a 13% return on the PV panels which cost £14,000. (Including
tax.)

So I have a house which gets/saves me almost £4,000/year.

So that would be worth paying out £40,000 extra would it not?
But I only paid out £3000 extra.
Plus a lot of hard work.

This is why you are a retard. No brain at all. Wind and ****.

On May 25, 6:27*pm, "Dave Liquorice"
wrote:
On Fri, 25 May 2012 09:54:14 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
I know of a system with ground source heat pump and solar thermal.
If
the solar thermal gets the store to it's maximum safe temperature
it
dumps the any excess heat into the ground but having thought about
it
that is just a heat sink the heat won't stay there 'till the
winter
to be pumped back out.

That's how heat pumps work - summer heat is stored in the ground over
winter.

Look up soil temperatures even 50cm down varies very little 1m down
is pretty much constant in the UK. If "summer heat" was being stored
down there the tempertaure would rise over the summer. And to store a
significant amount of heat would have to rise quite a bit.

Of course things get complicated when you start pumping the heat out
though as you create a localised artifical temperature gradient but
even so the area of land above a coiled tube based collector isn't
that great so won't receive anything like enough energy to supply
winter space heating requirements, just like some what more effcient
solar thermal collectors can't. And what about bore holes, 30 to 100m
deep?

There might be some contribution from summer heat but not much when
you are pumping 10kWHr+ out of the ground.

--
Cheers
Dave.

Most of the heat in the ground comes from rain percolating into it.
The rain is also why heat can't be stored there. The water "washes it
away."

On 25/05/2012 09:52, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Harry, all renewable energy devices are pointless.

That's a bit of a generalisation isn't it?

I gather the Aswan High Dam makes quite a bit of power, for example.

Andy

harry wrote:
On May 25, 9:54 am, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Fri, 25 May 2012 01:22:37 +0100,www.GymRatZ.co.ukwrote:
There is no reason why one couldn't install a larger collector but
what do you do with all that heat in the summer when you have no
space heating requiremen?
Ah well I was also thinking about that one earlier...
The front garden/drive etc could be used as an Interseasonal Thermal
Store.
Do the maths. To store a useful amount of heat you will need a big
store and lots of insulation. When planning the system here I did
half look at how big a store would need to be to supply a days heat.
I think it came out at about 1500l of water at 90C. So to store just
a months worth of heat it's getting a bit big...
I know of a system with ground source heat pump and solar thermal. If
the solar thermal gets the store to it's maximum safe temperature it
dumps the any excess heat into the ground but having thought about it
that is just a heat sink the heat won't stay there 'till the winter
to be pumped back out.
It actually can.

That's how heat pumps work - summer heat is stored in the ground over
winter.

--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Summer heat (renewable) that came from the sun and from rainfall.

Any heat pumped into the ground in summer is long gone by wintertbime.

No, it isnt.

Reversible heat pumps are not allowed for the RHI incentive for this
reason.


--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.

harry wrote:
On May 25, 6:27 pm, "Dave Liquorice"
wrote:
On Fri, 25 May 2012 09:54:14 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
I know of a system with ground source heat pump and solar thermal.
If
the solar thermal gets the store to it's maximum safe temperature
it
dumps the any excess heat into the ground but having thought about
it
that is just a heat sink the heat won't stay there 'till the
winter
to be pumped back out.
That's how heat pumps work - summer heat is stored in the ground over
winter.
Look up soil temperatures even 50cm down varies very little 1m down
is pretty much constant in the UK. If "summer heat" was being stored
down there the tempertaure would rise over the summer. And to store a
significant amount of heat would have to rise quite a bit.

Of course things get complicated when you start pumping the heat out
though as you create a localised artifical temperature gradient but
even so the area of land above a coiled tube based collector isn't
that great so won't receive anything like enough energy to supply
winter space heating requirements, just like some what more effcient
solar thermal collectors can't. And what about bore holes, 30 to 100m
deep?

There might be some contribution from summer heat but not much when
you are pumping 10kWHr+ out of the ground.

--
Cheers
Dave.

Most of the heat in the ground comes from rain percolating into it.

Utter tosh

The rain is also why heat can't be stored there. The water "washes it
away."


--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.

Andy Champ wrote:
On 25/05/2012 09:52, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Harry, all renewable energy devices are pointless.

That's a bit of a generalisation isn't it?

I gather the Aswan High Dam makes quite a bit of power, for example.

Andy
Intermittent renewable then.
We never called hydro power or burning rubbiosh 'renewable' until it
became a green marketing scam buzz word.


--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.

On Fri, 25 May 2012 11:28:35 -0700 (PDT), harry wrote:

Most of the heat in the ground comes from rain percolating into it.

That could be a transport mechanisium rather than conduction which is
the only other heat transfer method available in the ground.

The rain is also why heat can't be stored there. The water "washes it
away."

Moving ground water is certainly "a good thing" for a ground source
collector, the water constantly brings heat in from the surrouding
area. Dry sandy soils are not good, wet loamy ones are.

--
Cheers
Dave.

"harry" wrote in message
...
On May 25, 7:17 am, "Rod Speed" wrote:
"harry" wrote in message

...





On May 24, 10:00 pm, "www.GymRatZ.co.uk"
wrote:
On 24/05/2012 21:39, Rod Speed wrote:

And if you want something that really heats the water
properly to high temps, its better to have two separate
systems, one for the electricity and one for the water.

Thanks for input Rod
It all revolves around a proposed extension which will (if given the
go-ahead) give us a 15m long x 2.5m pitched roof with SW elevation.

Given that our house is heated just fine for both UFH and Rad. zones
with max. flow rate of 55 degrees C and we're sort sort of down south
(Bristol latitude) if I could get 55 degrees from such a system for 4
hours of the day in deep winter it _might_ prove to be of significant
benefit by offsetting boiler run/start time into the evening.

Perhaps a summer/winter diverter that could (pre)heat DHW in summer
and
CH in winter...

Just foundhttp://www.newformenergy.com/
and bounced them a few questions.

All depends on planning app. at the moment though... (and of course
price of such a hybrid solution)
8¬|

Cheers - Pete
--http://www.GymRatZ.co.uk-Fitness+Gym Equipment.
Such a device is pointless. You don't need
any house heating when the sun is shining.

More mindless drivel, most obviously with existing
houses that arent practical to redo as passive solar etc.

Heat collected in Winter is minimal in the UK climate.

Wrong, as always. Passive solar works fine there, fool.-

I have a passive house.

But don't have anything viable between the ears to work
out the basics with.

I know what works and what doesn't.

You clearly don't with that stupid claim about sunny days in winter.

"harry" wrote in message
...
On May 25, 8:53 am, "Dave Liquorice"
wrote:
On Fri, 25 May 2012 01:22:37 +0100,www.GymRatZ.co.ukwrote:
There is no reason why one couldn't install a larger collector but
what do you do with all that heat in the summer when you have no
space heating requiremen?

Ah well I was also thinking about that one earlier...
The front garden/drive etc could be used as an Interseasonal Thermal
Store.

Do the maths. To store a useful amount of heat you will need a big
store and lots of insulation. When planning the system here I did
half look at how big a store would need to be to supply a days heat.
I think it came out at about 1500l of water at 90C. So to store just
a months worth of heat it's getting a bit big...

I know of a system with ground source heat pump and solar thermal. If
the solar thermal gets the store to it's maximum safe temperature it
dumps the any excess heat into the ground but having thought about it
that is just a heat sink the heat won't stay there 'till the winter
to be pumped back out.

Exactly so. A passive house need only get 5% of it's energy from non solar
sources.

That number is straight from your arse, we can tell from the smell.

So that much expense for active heating makes no sense at all.

Depends entirely on what the active heating involves.

Another point is that the heat has
leaked away by the time you need it.

Even sillier with hot water. Its completely trivial and dirt cheap to
insulate it well enough so it doesn't leak away by the time you need
it, even if your main hot water use is for showers that are early enough
that there has been no solar heating that day by shower time.

"harry" wrote in message
...
On May 25, 9:45 am, "www.GymRatZ.co.uk"
wrote:
On 25/05/2012 06:42, harry wrote:

Such a device is pointless. You don't need any house heating when the
sun is shining. Heat collected in Winter is minimal in the UK climate.

But if the cooling of the PV increases their output and can provide a
20+ (?) degree temperature rise to pre-heat mains cold water before it
goes through the combi. that could in it's self could make quite a
reduction on gas consumption during summer months for DHW would it not?

(throwing ideas in the air for discussion and dissection)

--http://www.GymRatZ.co.uk- Fitness+Gym Equipment.

The final solution is massive insulation, large south windows and
small north windows, all with insulated shutters.
KISS.
Keep It Stupid Simple
Apart from the PV array, you need no high tech crap.
I have no gas, oil or electric heating.
I have thermal mass.

It works.

It does indeed. And automating the shutters etc works even better.

I have such a house which was converted from an ordinary house.

It works much better when the house is designed from scratch for that.

I am writing a book.

Is this where we're all sposed to swoon or sumfin ?

"harry" wrote in message
...
On May 25, 9:56 am, Martin Brown
wrote:
On 25/05/2012 09:45,www.GymRatZ.co.ukwrote:

On 25/05/2012 06:42, harry wrote:

Such a device is pointless. You don't need any house heating when the
sun is shining. Heat collected in Winter is minimal in the UK climate.

But if the cooling of the PV increases their output and can provide a
20+ (?) degree temperature rise to pre-heat mains cold water before it
goes through the combi. that could in it's self could make quite a
reduction on gas consumption during summer months for DHW would it not?

(throwing ideas in the air for discussion and dissection)

The problem is one of cost effectiveness and complexity.

There is no point in saving power usage to create vast quantities of
lukewarm water that you don't need in mid-summer if it makes the whole
installation a lot more expensive and prone to failure.

A rough rule of thumb is that summer DHW is less than 10% maybe as low
as 5% of peak winter space heating requirements. We are just too far
north for solar power to be sensible without market distorting FITs.

Quite right. But that depends on the price of fossil fuel and PVpanels.

Nuclear power is subsidised too.

Sometimes it is, sometimes it aint. It aint in France.

If I want free hot water, I can turn the immersion
heater on when the sun is shining (PVpower).

Makes a hell of a lot more sense to heat it directly
with the solar when that is available and not go thru
electricity which ****s the efficiency and costs a lot
more than a solar hot water system does.

if I am feelng public spirited, I turn on my solar thermal array.

The house is mostly kept warm by your furious wanking.

Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Fri, 25 May 2012 11:28:35 -0700 (PDT), harry wrote:

Most of the heat in the ground comes from rain percolating into it.

That could be a transport mechanisium rather than conduction which is
the only other heat transfer method available in the ground.

The rain is also why heat can't be stored there. The water "washes it
away."

Moving ground water is certainly "a good thing" for a ground source
collector, the water constantly brings heat in from the surrouding
area. Dry sandy soils are not good, wet loamy ones are.

dioesnt neet to move. Wet soil conducts better, its as simple as that.


--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.

"harry" wrote in message
...
On May 25, 10:58 am, "Rod Speed" wrote:
wrote in message

...





On May 25, 6:42 am, harry wrote:
On May 24, 10:00 pm, "www.GymRatZ.co.uk"

wrote:
On 24/05/2012 21:39, Rod Speed wrote:

And if you want something that really heats the water
properly to high temps, its better to have two separate
systems, one for the electricity and one for the water.

Thanks for input Rod
It all revolves around a proposed extension which will (if given the
go-ahead) give us a 15m long x 2.5m pitched roof with SW elevation.

Given that our house is heated just fine for both UFH and Rad. zones
with max. flow rate of 55 degrees C and we're sort sort of down
south
(Bristol latitude) if I could get 55 degrees from such a system for
4
hours of the day in deep winter it _might_ prove to be of
significant
benefit by offsetting boiler run/start time into the evening.

Perhaps a summer/winter diverter that could (pre)heat DHW in summer
and
CH in winter...

Just foundhttp://www.newformenergy.com/
and bounced them a few questions.

All depends on planning app. at the moment though... (and of course
price of such a hybrid solution)
8¬|

Cheers - Pete
--http://www.GymRatZ.co.uk-Fitness+GymEquipment.

Such a device is pointless. You don't need any house heating when the
sun is shining. Heat collected in Winter is minimal in the UK climate.
Spend your money on insulation.
Rod is from Oz ergo most of the stuff he rambles on about is
irrelevant here in the UK.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ara-chl...7627608971673/
Whose house is that?

His.

It must be like living in a tomb.

Entirely appropriate given that he has one foot in the grave.

And it's a ****ed passive solar system. The windows are MUCH too
short vertically and there is no eave to stop solar input in summer
either.-

Vertically high windoes can't be effectively solar shaded,

Wrong, as always.

especially in far north locations such as ours

Wrong, as always.

Tch Tch. Solar shading is less needed in our climate than yours.

Still needed at times in summer even there.

And the house works.

And would work much better if it had been done better.

What have you actually achieved?

Designed a passive solar house from scratch,
built it entirely from a bare block of land myself,
and it works a hell of a lot better than your does.

I was also involved in the design and construction and
running of a couple of solar greenhouses that leaves
your tomb for dead and I was paid to do that too.

"harry" wrote in message
...
On May 25, 9:45 am, "www.GymRatZ.co.uk"
wrote:
On 25/05/2012 06:42, harry wrote:

Such a device is pointless. You don't need any house heating when the
sun is shining. Heat collected in Winter is minimal in the UK climate.

But if the cooling of the PV increases their output and can provide a
20+ (?) degree temperature rise to pre-heat mains cold water before it
goes through the combi. that could in it's self could make quite a
reduction on gas consumption during summer months for DHW would it not?

(throwing ideas in the air for discussion and dissection)

--http://www.GymRatZ.co.uk- Fitness+Gym Equipment.

The final solution is massive insulation, large south windows and
small north windows, all with insulated shutters.
KISS.
Keep It Stupid Simple
Apart from the PV array, you need no high tech crap.
I have no gas, oil or electric heating.
I have thermal mass.

It works. I have such a house which was converted from an ordinary
house.
I am writing a book.

Any particular variety of thermal underwear?

Andy Champ wrote
The Natural Philosopher wrote

Harry, all renewable energy devices are pointless.

That's a bit of a generalisation isn't it?

Yeah, completely silly.

I gather the Aswan High Dam makes
quite a bit of power, for example.

And so do plenty of other hydro systems too.

And even solar isnt useless when its
not economic to connect to the grid.

Windmill water pumps in spades.

"Rod Speed" wrote in message
...
Andy Champ wrote
The Natural Philosopher wrote

Harry, all renewable energy devices are pointless.

That's a bit of a generalisation isn't it?

Yeah, completely silly.
I gather the Aswan High Dam makes quite a bit of power, for example.

And so do plenty of other hydro systems too.
And even solar isnt useless when its not economic to connect to the grid.
Windmill water pumps in spades.


You should get some sleep old son, give us all a break from ********.

brass monkey wrote:
"Rod Speed" wrote in message
...
Andy Champ wrote
The Natural Philosopher wrote
Harry, all renewable energy devices are pointless.
That's a bit of a generalisation isn't it?
Yeah, completely silly.
I gather the Aswan High Dam makes quite a bit of power, for example.
And so do plenty of other hydro systems too.
And even solar isnt useless when its not economic to connect to the grid.
Windmill water pumps in spades.


You should get some sleep old son, give us all a break from ********.




Indeed :-)

As an aside, since our resident spiv raised the point, its now summer
when 'solar panels do their best' and its also the first night when
demand has dropped below 25GW for the nation..


Oh dear.


http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/


--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.

On May 25, 8:37*pm, Andy Champ wrote:
On 25/05/2012 09:52, The Natural Philosopher wrote:



Harry, all renewable energy devices are pointless.

That's a bit of a generalisation isn't it?

I gather the Aswan High Dam makes quite a bit of power, for example.

Andy


Don't baffle him. He's never heard of it. I have been there and to
Iguassu (Brasil) far bigger still.

On May 25, 11:12*pm, "Dave Liquorice"
wrote:
On Fri, 25 May 2012 11:28:35 -0700 (PDT), harry wrote:
Most of the heat in the ground comes from rain percolating into it.

That could be a transport mechanisium rather than conduction which is
the only other heat transfer method available in the ground.

The rain is also why heat can't be stored there. The water "washes it
away."

Moving ground water is certainly "a good thing" for a ground source
collector, the water constantly brings heat in from the surrouding
area. Dry sandy soils are not good, wet loamy ones are.

--
Cheers
Dave.

You are exactly right.
I have a nieghbour with a heat pump. He has two bore holes. Pumps
water out of one and back (very cold) into the other. Now if you want
to see futile expense, it is a glaring example.

But heat from the sun only penetrates a short way. The rain carries
the heat in deeper. And would also carry away heat put in from any
other source.
Storing heat in the ground is a waste of time unless it is
artificially confined by some means

There was a technique to help in this. An "umbrella" of plastic is
installed/buried over the heat rejection/recovery pipes. It failed
because dry soil has a lower specific heat and is less conductive.
Now they install porous pipe with the heat recovery pipe and inject
water to improve heat transfer by keeping the soil wet/damp.
Obviously clay soils work best.
..

BTW. If the topic interests you there is the Renewable Heat incentive
almost up and running. Could be as good as the FIT. but with heat
pumps etc. and they pay you money for years after. Your heat use is
assessed.
I did look into it but with my passive house the income would be
small.
But it's better than money in the bank these days.

On May 26, 12:14*am, "Rod Speed" wrote:
"harry" wrote in message

...





On May 25, 9:56 am, Martin Brown
wrote:
On 25/05/2012 09:45,www.GymRatZ.co.ukwrote:

On 25/05/2012 06:42, harry wrote:

Such a device is pointless. *You don't need any house heating when the
sun is shining. Heat collected in Winter is minimal in the UK climate.

But if the cooling of the PV increases their output and can provide a
20+ (?) degree temperature rise to pre-heat mains cold water before it
goes through the combi. that could in it's self could make quite a
reduction on gas consumption during summer months for DHW would it not?

(throwing ideas in the air for discussion and dissection)

The problem is one of cost effectiveness and complexity.

There is no point in saving power usage to create vast quantities of
lukewarm water that you don't need in mid-summer if it makes the whole
installation a lot more expensive and prone to failure.

A rough rule of thumb is that summer DHW is less than 10% maybe as low
as 5% of peak winter space heating requirements. We are just too far
north for solar power to be sensible without market distorting FITs.
Quite right. *But that depends on the price of fossil fuel and PVpanels.
Nuclear power is subsidised too.

Sometimes it is, sometimes it aint. It aint in France.

If I want free hot water, I can turn the immersion
heater on when the sun is shining (PVpower).

Makes a hell of a lot more sense to heat it directly
with the solar when that is available and not go thru
electricity which ****s the efficiency and costs a lot
more than a solar hot water system does.

if I am feelng public spirited, I turn on my solar thermal array.

The house is mostly kept warm by your furious wanking.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I am paid for electricity whether I use it myself or not you tosspot.

On May 26, 12:22*am, "Rod Speed" wrote:
"harry" wrote in message

...





On May 25, 10:58 am, "Rod Speed" wrote:
wrote in message

....

On May 25, 6:42 am, harry wrote:
On May 24, 10:00 pm, "www.GymRatZ.co.uk"

wrote:
On 24/05/2012 21:39, Rod Speed wrote:

And if you want something that really heats the water
properly to high temps, its better to have two separate
systems, one for the electricity and one for the water.

Thanks for input Rod
It all revolves around a proposed extension which will (if given the
go-ahead) give us a 15m long x 2.5m pitched roof with SW elevation.

"harry" wrote in message
...
On May 26, 12:22 am, "Rod Speed" wrote:
"harry" wrote in message

...





On May 25, 10:58 am, "Rod Speed" wrote:
wrote in message

...

On May 25, 6:42 am, harry wrote:
On May 24, 10:00 pm, "www.GymRatZ.co.uk"

wrote:
On 24/05/2012 21:39, Rod Speed wrote:

And if you want something that really heats the water
properly to high temps, its better to have two separate
systems, one for the electricity and one for the water.

Thanks for input Rod
It all revolves around a proposed extension which will (if given
the
go-ahead) give us a 15m long x 2.5m pitched roof with SW
elevation.

Given that our house is heated just fine for both UFH and Rad.
zones
with max. flow rate of 55 degrees C and we're sort sort of down
south
(Bristol latitude) if I could get 55 degrees from such a system
for
4
hours of the day in deep winter it _might_ prove to be of
significant
benefit by offsetting boiler run/start time into the evening.

Perhaps a summer/winter diverter that could (pre)heat DHW in
summer
and
CH in winter...

Just foundhttp://www.newformenergy.com/
and bounced them a few questions.

All depends on planning app. at the moment though... (and of
course
price of such a hybrid solution)
8¬|

Cheers - Pete
--http://www.GymRatZ.co.uk-Fitness+GymEquipment.

Such a device is pointless. You don't need any house heating when
the
sun is shining. Heat collected in Winter is minimal in the UK
climate.
Spend your money on insulation.
Rod is from Oz ergo most of the stuff he rambles on about is
irrelevant here in the UK.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ara-chl...7627608971673/
Whose house is that?

His.

It must be like living in a tomb.

Entirely appropriate given that he has one foot in the grave.

And it's a ****ed passive solar system. The windows are MUCH too
short vertically and there is no eave to stop solar input in summer
either.-
Vertically high windoes can't be effectively solar shaded,

Wrong, as always.

especially in far north locations such as ours

Wrong, as always.

Tch Tch. Solar shading is less needed in our climate than yours.

Still needed at times in summer even there.

And the house works.

And would work much better if it had been done better.

What have you actually achieved?

Designed a passive solar house from scratch,
built it entirely from a bare block of land myself,
and it works a hell of a lot better than your does.

I was also involved in the design and construction and
running of a couple of solar greenhouses that leaves
your tomb for dead and I was paid to do that too.-

Pictures?

Of what ?

On 25/05/2012 19:12, harry wrote:
On May 25, 9:56 am, Martin
wrote:
On 25/05/2012 09:45,www.GymRatZ.co.ukwrote:

(throwing ideas in the air for discussion and dissection)

The problem is one of cost effectiveness and complexity.

There is no point in saving power usage to create vast quantities of
lukewarm water that you don't need in mid-summer if it makes the whole
installation a lot more expensive and prone to failure.

A rough rule of thumb is that summer DHW is less than 10% maybe as low
as 5% of peak winter space heating requirements. We are just too far
north for solar power to be sensible without market distorting FITs.

How so?
My PV panels generate more energy then I use. I need no further fuel
purchases for the next 20 odd years. There is no maintenance. It is
a one off expense.

It makes no economic sense at all without the governments incorrectly
computed market distorting FIT payments.

The same kit installed at a sensible and sunny latitude would yield a
lifetime energy payback of 7-10x that of manufacture. At UK latitudes
you will be very lucky to get 4x (assuming here an unproven 25y life).

I think you will find maintenance becomes an issue after 10-15 years.

If I bought s diesel generator I would be buying fuel for evermore.

Indeed but you might like to calculate how long it would take before the
cost of diesel exceeds the cost of your PV array. Without the
governments ill thought out solar subsidy the whole thing is daft!

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

"harry" wrote in message
...
On May 26, 12:14 am, "Rod Speed" wrote:
"harry" wrote in message

...





On May 25, 9:56 am, Martin Brown
wrote:
On 25/05/2012 09:45,www.GymRatZ.co.ukwrote:

On 25/05/2012 06:42, harry wrote:

Such a device is pointless. You don't need any house heating when
the
sun is shining. Heat collected in Winter is minimal in the UK
climate.

But if the cooling of the PV increases their output and can provide
a
20+ (?) degree temperature rise to pre-heat mains cold water before
it
goes through the combi. that could in it's self could make quite a
reduction on gas consumption during summer months for DHW would it
not?

(throwing ideas in the air for discussion and dissection)

The problem is one of cost effectiveness and complexity.

There is no point in saving power usage to create vast quantities of
lukewarm water that you don't need in mid-summer if it makes the whole
installation a lot more expensive and prone to failure.

A rough rule of thumb is that summer DHW is less than 10% maybe as low
as 5% of peak winter space heating requirements. We are just too far
north for solar power to be sensible without market distorting FITs.
Quite right. But that depends on the price of fossil fuel and
PVpanels.
Nuclear power is subsidised too.

Sometimes it is, sometimes it aint. It aint in France.

If I want free hot water, I can turn the immersion
heater on when the sun is shining (PVpower).

Makes a hell of a lot more sense to heat it directly
with the solar when that is available and not go thru
electricity which ****s the efficiency and costs a lot
more than a solar hot water system does.

if I am feelng public spirited, I turn on my solar thermal array.

The house is mostly kept warm by your furious wanking.-

I am paid for electricity whether I use it myself or not

And only a terminal ****wit such as yourself is actually
stupid enough to do things the grossly inefficient way,
just because it is paid by stupid politicians like that.

On May 26, 3:16*pm, Martin Brown
wrote:
On 25/05/2012 19:12, harry wrote:





On May 25, 9:56 am, Martin
wrote:
On 25/05/2012 09:45,www.GymRatZ.co.ukwrote:

(throwing ideas in the air for discussion and dissection)

The problem is one of cost effectiveness and complexity.

There is no point in saving power usage to create vast quantities of
lukewarm water that you don't need in mid-summer if it makes the whole
installation a lot more expensive and prone to failure.

A rough rule of thumb is that summer DHW is less than 10% maybe as low
as 5% of peak winter space heating requirements. We are just too far
north for solar power to be sensible without market distorting FITs.

How so?
My PV panels generate more energy then I use. I need no further fuel
purchases for the next 20 odd years. *There is no maintenance. *It is
a one off expense.

It makes no economic sense at all without the governments incorrectly
computed market distorting FIT payments.

The same kit installed at a sensible and sunny latitude would yield a
lifetime energy payback of 7-10x that of manufacture. At UK latitudes
you will be very lucky to get 4x (assuming here an unproven 25y life).

I think you will find maintenance becomes an issue after 10-15 years.

Why do you think that?
It will have paid for itselfl ong before that anyway.

On May 26, 3:16*pm, Martin Brown
wrote:
On 25/05/2012 19:12, harry wrote:





On May 25, 9:56 am, Martin
wrote:
On 25/05/2012 09:45,www.GymRatZ.co.ukwrote:

(throwing ideas in the air for discussion and dissection)

The problem is one of cost effectiveness and complexity.

There is no point in saving power usage to create vast quantities of
lukewarm water that you don't need in mid-summer if it makes the whole
installation a lot more expensive and prone to failure.

A rough rule of thumb is that summer DHW is less than 10% maybe as low
as 5% of peak winter space heating requirements. We are just too far
north for solar power to be sensible without market distorting FITs.

How so?
My PV panels generate more energy then I use. I need no further fuel
purchases for the next 20 odd years. *There is no maintenance. *It is
a one off expense.

It makes no economic sense at all without the governments incorrectly
computed market distorting FIT payments.

The same kit installed at a sensible and sunny latitude would yield a
lifetime energy payback of 7-10x that of manufacture. At UK latitudes
you will be very lucky to get 4x (assuming here an unproven 25y life).

I think you will find maintenance becomes an issue after 10-15 years.

If I bought s diesel generator I would be buying fuel for evermore.

Indeed but you might like to calculate how long it would take before the
cost of diesel exceeds the cost of your PV array. Without the
governments ill thought out solar subsidy the whole thing is daft!

It is an initiation programme to get the idea off the ground. If
anyone is daft it's you.
French nuclear power is heavily subsidised.
Who for exampleis funding the nuclear waste disposal hole they are
digging right now?

"harry" wrote in message
...
On May 26, 3:16 pm, Martin Brown
wrote:
On 25/05/2012 19:12, harry wrote:





On May 25, 9:56 am, Martin
wrote:
On 25/05/2012 09:45,www.GymRatZ.co.ukwrote:

(throwing ideas in the air for discussion and dissection)

The problem is one of cost effectiveness and complexity.

There is no point in saving power usage to create vast quantities of
lukewarm water that you don't need in mid-summer if it makes the whole
installation a lot more expensive and prone to failure.

A rough rule of thumb is that summer DHW is less than 10% maybe as low
as 5% of peak winter space heating requirements. We are just too far
north for solar power to be sensible without market distorting FITs.

How so?
My PV panels generate more energy then I use. I need no further fuel
purchases for the next 20 odd years. There is no maintenance. It is
a one off expense.

It makes no economic sense at all without the governments incorrectly
computed market distorting FIT payments.

The same kit installed at a sensible and sunny latitude would yield a
lifetime energy payback of 7-10x that of manufacture. At UK latitudes
you will be very lucky to get 4x (assuming here an unproven 25y life).

I think you will find maintenance becomes an issue after 10-15 years.

Why do you think that?

Because PVs have been used for a lot longer than that now.

It will have paid for itselfl ong before that anyway.

Only because of the stupid market distorting FIT payments.

"harry" wrote in message
...
On May 26, 3:16 pm, Martin Brown
wrote:
On 25/05/2012 19:12, harry wrote:





On May 25, 9:56 am, Martin
wrote:
On 25/05/2012 09:45,www.GymRatZ.co.ukwrote:

(throwing ideas in the air for discussion and dissection)

The problem is one of cost effectiveness and complexity.

There is no point in saving power usage to create vast quantities of
lukewarm water that you don't need in mid-summer if it makes the whole
installation a lot more expensive and prone to failure.

A rough rule of thumb is that summer DHW is less than 10% maybe as low
as 5% of peak winter space heating requirements. We are just too far
north for solar power to be sensible without market distorting FITs.

How so?
My PV panels generate more energy then I use. I need no further fuel
purchases for the next 20 odd years. There is no maintenance. It is
a one off expense.

It makes no economic sense at all without the governments incorrectly
computed market distorting FIT payments.

The same kit installed at a sensible and sunny latitude would yield a
lifetime energy payback of 7-10x that of manufacture. At UK latitudes
you will be very lucky to get 4x (assuming here an unproven 25y life).

I think you will find maintenance becomes an issue after 10-15 years.

If I bought s diesel generator I would be buying fuel for evermore.

Indeed but you might like to calculate how long it would take before the
cost of diesel exceeds the cost of your PV array. Without the
governments ill thought out solar subsidy the whole thing is daft!

It is an initiation programme to get the idea off the ground.

Its actually just another political terminal stupidity that makes no sense
whatever.

If anyone is daft it's you.

Nope, that stupid scheme is.

French nuclear power is heavily subsidised.

Another bare faced pig ignorant lie.

Who for example is funding the nuclear waste
disposal hole they are digging right now?

Those generating power with nukes, stupid.

On May 27, 8:11*am, "Rod Speed" wrote:
"harry" wrote in message

...





On May 26, 3:16 pm, Martin Brown
wrote:
On 25/05/2012 19:12, harry wrote:

On May 25, 9:56 am, Martin
wrote:
On 25/05/2012 09:45,www.GymRatZ.co.ukwrote:

(throwing ideas in the air for discussion and dissection)

The problem is one of cost effectiveness and complexity.

There is no point in saving power usage to create vast quantities of
lukewarm water that you don't need in mid-summer if it makes the whole
installation a lot more expensive and prone to failure.

A rough rule of thumb is that summer DHW is less than 10% maybe as low
as 5% of peak winter space heating requirements. We are just too far
north for solar power to be sensible without market distorting FITs..

How so?
My PV panels generate more energy then I use. I need no further fuel
purchases for the next 20 odd years. *There is no maintenance. *It is
a one off expense.

It makes no economic sense at all without the governments incorrectly
computed market distorting FIT payments.

The same kit installed at a sensible and sunny latitude would yield a
lifetime energy payback of 7-10x that of manufacture. At UK latitudes
you will be very lucky to get 4x (assuming here an unproven 25y life).

I think you will find maintenance becomes an issue after 10-15 years.

If I bought s diesel generator I would be buying fuel for evermore.

Indeed but you might like to calculate how long it would take before the
cost of diesel exceeds the cost of your PV array. Without the
governments ill thought out solar subsidy the whole thing is daft!
It is an initiation programme to get the *idea off the ground.

Its actually just another political terminal stupidity that makes no sense
whatever.

If anyone is daft it's you.

Nope, that stupid scheme is.

French nuclear power is heavily subsidised.

Another bare faced pig ignorant lie.

Who for example is funding the nuclear waste
disposal hole they are digging right now?

Those generating power with nukes, stupid.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The French taxpayer is paying.

"harry" wrote in message
...
On May 27, 8:11 am, "Rod Speed" wrote:
"harry" wrote in message

...





On May 26, 3:16 pm, Martin Brown
wrote:
On 25/05/2012 19:12, harry wrote:

On May 25, 9:56 am, Martin
wrote:
On 25/05/2012 09:45,www.GymRatZ.co.ukwrote:

(throwing ideas in the air for discussion and dissection)

The problem is one of cost effectiveness and complexity.

There is no point in saving power usage to create vast quantities
of
lukewarm water that you don't need in mid-summer if it makes the
whole
installation a lot more expensive and prone to failure.

A rough rule of thumb is that summer DHW is less than 10% maybe as
low
as 5% of peak winter space heating requirements. We are just too
far
north for solar power to be sensible without market distorting
FITs.

How so?
My PV panels generate more energy then I use. I need no further fuel
purchases for the next 20 odd years. There is no maintenance. It
is
a one off expense.

It makes no economic sense at all without the governments incorrectly
computed market distorting FIT payments.

The same kit installed at a sensible and sunny latitude would yield a
lifetime energy payback of 7-10x that of manufacture. At UK latitudes
you will be very lucky to get 4x (assuming here an unproven 25y life).

I think you will find maintenance becomes an issue after 10-15 years.

If I bought s diesel generator I would be buying fuel for evermore.

Indeed but you might like to calculate how long it would take before
the
cost of diesel exceeds the cost of your PV array. Without the
governments ill thought out solar subsidy the whole thing is daft!
It is an initiation programme to get the idea off the ground.

Its actually just another political terminal stupidity that makes no
sense
whatever.

If anyone is daft it's you.

Nope, that stupid scheme is.

French nuclear power is heavily subsidised.

Another bare faced pig ignorant lie.

Who for example is funding the nuclear waste
disposal hole they are digging right now?

Those generating power with nukes, stupid.-

The French taxpayer is paying.

And when they all use electricity, what's the problem with that ?