https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-57149059

"Jim GM4DHJ ..." wrote in message
...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-57149059

yup

banning gas boilers only makes any sense when 100% of UK electricity
production is carbon free

until it is, simply transferring gas use to additional electric use is just
daft

On Tue, 18 May 2021 11:34:53 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:



"Jim GM4DHJ ..." wrote in message
...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-57149059

yup

banning gas boilers only makes any sense when 100% of UK electricity
production is carbon free

until it is, simply transferring gas use to additional electric use is just
daft

Not following your line of thought here. AIUI gas boilers are 100%
gas and electricity generation is far less than 100% gas - and
declining..

On 18/05/2021 11:34, tim... wrote:


"Jim GM4DHJ ..." wrote in message
...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-57149059

yup

banning gas boilers only makes any sense when 100% of UK electricity
production is carbon free

until it is, simply transferring gas use to additional electric use is
just daft



ArtStudents„¢ like to build a houses interior decor and layout before
they do the foundations or the roof.

--
Gun Control: The law that ensures that only criminals have guns.

On 18/05/2021 11:42, Scott wrote:
On Tue, 18 May 2021 11:34:53 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:



"Jim GM4DHJ ..." wrote in message
...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-57149059

yup

banning gas boilers only makes any sense when 100% of UK electricity
production is carbon free

until it is, simply transferring gas use to additional electric use is just
daft

Not following your line of thought here. AIUI gas boilers are 100%
gas and electricity generation is far less than 100% gas - and
declining..

It's worse than that. A gas boiler is 80-96% efficient. Generating
electricity from fossil fuel is ~30% taking into account generation and
transmission.

Until we are 60+% non-fossil fuelled electricity generation more carbon
will be thrown into the atmosphere if we are force to move to electric
heating.

1) Yes I know air/ground sourced heating is available with improved
efficiency.

2) Car battery charging is going to require more electrical generation
which is already limited and no plans to build more generating plant.

In article ,
tim... wrote:


"Jim GM4DHJ ..." wrote in message
...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-57149059

yup

banning gas boilers only makes any sense when 100% of UK electricity
production is carbon free

It can make sense to reduce local pollution.

until it is, simply transferring gas use to additional electric use is
just daft

What is daft is charging a higher price per kilowatt of electricity than
gas.

--
*Just give me chocolate and nobody gets hurt

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

In article ,
Fredxx wrote:
Not following your line of thought here. AIUI gas boilers are 100%
gas and electricity generation is far less than 100% gas - and
declining..

It's worse than that. A gas boiler is 80-96% efficient. Generating
electricity from fossil fuel is ~30% taking into account generation and
transmission.

Is this really the case with electricity generated with gas, so like for
like?

And how about the energy used to get the gas from wherever to your house?

If making meaningful comparisons, best to start with a level playing field.

--
*I used to have an open mind but my brains kept falling out *

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

On 18/05/2021 13:44, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Fredxx wrote:
Not following your line of thought here. AIUI gas boilers are 100%
gas and electricity generation is far less than 100% gas - and
declining..

It's worse than that. A gas boiler is 80-96% efficient. Generating
electricity from fossil fuel is ~30% taking into account generation and
transmission.

Is this really the case with electricity generated with gas, so like for
like?

I guess overall there is little to choose from, apart from a lot of
complex hardware at each end.

And how about the energy used to get the gas from wherever to your house?

Good question. The thing with gas is the pipelines are used to even out
use over time, essentially a means of storage.

If making meaningful comparisons, best to start with a level playing field.

I agree, but not everyone is going to have access to ground or allowed
to place large fan units on their building.

I would wager that most systems will have a cooling capability, which
will increase electricity consumption in the summer.

On 18/05/2021 13:41, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
tim... wrote:


"Jim GM4DHJ ..." wrote in message
...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-57149059

yup

banning gas boilers only makes any sense when 100% of UK electricity
production is carbon free

It can make sense to reduce local pollution.

It depends on what you mean by pollution? There are places where NOx
emissions are significant from NG boilers. Perhaps ban them from cities? :-)

until it is, simply transferring gas use to additional electric use is
just daft

What is daft is charging a higher price per kilowatt of electricity than
gas.

Why when generating electricity creates more CO2?

In article ,
Fredxx wrote:
On 18/05/2021 13:41, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
tim... wrote:


"Jim GM4DHJ ..." wrote in message
...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-57149059

yup

banning gas boilers only makes any sense when 100% of UK electricity
production is carbon free

It can make sense to reduce local pollution.

It depends on what you mean by pollution? There are places where NOx
emissions are significant from NG boilers. Perhaps ban them from cities? :-)

Any NOx generation may be regarded as significant. The amount a boiler
generates can also depend on its age and condition.

until it is, simply transferring gas use to additional electric use is
just daft

What is daft is charging a higher price per kilowatt of electricity than
gas.

Why when generating electricity creates more CO2?

Well, electricity can do most things where energy is needed. Gas not so -
unless that nice Mr Bayliss also invented a gas radio.

--
*I see you've set aside this special time to humiliate yourself in public

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

On 18/05/2021 16:10, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Fredxx wrote:
On 18/05/2021 13:41, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
tim... wrote:


"Jim GM4DHJ ..." wrote in message
...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-57149059

yup

banning gas boilers only makes any sense when 100% of UK electricity
production is carbon free

It can make sense to reduce local pollution.

It depends on what you mean by pollution? There are places where NOx
emissions are significant from NG boilers. Perhaps ban them from cities? :-)

Any NOx generation may be regarded as significant. The amount a boiler
generates can also depend on its age and condition.

The newer ones are worse. Old boilers with an excess of air had a colder
flame and produced less NOx.

until it is, simply transferring gas use to additional electric use is
just daft

What is daft is charging a higher price per kilowatt of electricity than
gas.

Why when generating electricity creates more CO2?

Well, electricity can do most things where energy is needed. Gas not so -
unless that nice Mr Bayliss also invented a gas radio.

Yes it can do more things but at a cost, such as producing more CO2. I
thought we wanted to decrease CO2 production, not advocate an increase.

As I said in another thread, it won't happen, at least not at much of a
speed as everyone will get their boilers fitted before hand and its going to
be theier slow demise that they hope will allow time to ramp up generation,
but Unless they use portable nuclear I cannot see how, Turn the English
channel into a tidal power station perhaps? grin.
Brian

--

This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"tim..." wrote in message
...


"Jim GM4DHJ ..." wrote in message
...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-57149059

yup

banning gas boilers only makes any sense when 100% of UK electricity
production is carbon free

until it is, simply transferring gas use to additional electric use is
just daft

"Scott" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 18 May 2021 11:34:53 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:



"Jim GM4DHJ ..." wrote in message
...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-57149059

yup

banning gas boilers only makes any sense when 100% of UK electricity
production is carbon free

until it is, simply transferring gas use to additional electric use is
just
daft

Not following your line of thought here. AIUI gas boilers are 100%
gas and electricity generation is far less than 100% gas - and
declining..

Gas isn't the worst non-renewable

So, It isn't just the amount of electricity that's produced by gas that's
important, it's the amount that produced by anything that isn't renewable.

and whilst the amount of the current electricity demand is moving to
renewable, where's the supply for the 100% increase [1] in amount needed
when everybody move from gas to electric, going to come from?

tim

[1] I use approx the same number of kWh of gas per year, space and water
heating, as I do electric on everything else. And I have a *very* well
insulated house.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
tim... wrote:


"Jim GM4DHJ ..." wrote in message
...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-57149059

yup

banning gas boilers only makes any sense when 100% of UK electricity
production is carbon free

It can make sense to reduce local pollution.

Assuming you are talking about public health considerations, that surely has
to be a tiny effect

until it is, simply transferring gas use to additional electric use is
just daft

What is daft is charging a higher price per kilowatt of electricity than
gas.

given that gas is one of the fuels that we use to make electricity, and
making electricity costs money

it's simple economics that supply of manufactured electricity will cost more
than raw gas

It's expecting anything else that is daft

On 18/05/2021 13:41, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
tim... wrote:
"Jim GM4DHJ ..." wrote in message
...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-57149059

yup

banning gas boilers only makes any sense when 100% of UK electricity
production is carbon free

It can make sense to reduce local pollution.

until it is, simply transferring gas use to additional electric use is
just daft

What is daft is charging a higher price per kilowatt of electricity than
gas.

That's mostly down to the second law of thermodynamics.

Efficiency = (input temp - output temp)/(input temp) for a heat engine.

A gas power station is 30-50% efficient, the rest being waste heat
unless you can use it for something like district heating.

--
Max Demian

On 19/05/2021 12:25, Max Demian wrote:
A gas power station is 30-50% efficient, the rest being waste heat
unless you can use it for something like district heating.

OCGT is 37%¸ strap a steam boiler in the exhaust (CCGT) and its over 60%
when run constantly as baseload.

Of course, when run in 'whore's drawers' mode to back up intermittent
renewables, its back down to not much over 45%...


--
€œIdeas are inherently conservative. They yield not to the attack of
other ideas but to the massive onslaught of circumstance"

- John K Galbraith

In article ,
tim... wrote:


"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
tim... wrote:


"Jim GM4DHJ ..." wrote in message
...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-57149059

yup

banning gas boilers only makes any sense when 100% of UK electricity
production is carbon free

It can make sense to reduce local pollution.

Assuming you are talking about public health considerations, that surely
has to be a tiny effect

When the coroner in London ruled that the little girl who died a few
months ago was due to pollution, there was quite a local fuss. Of course
transport got the blame since she lived close to a busy main road, but
several different types of sources will have contributed to that pollution.

until it is, simply transferring gas use to additional electric use
is just daft

What is daft is charging a higher price per kilowatt of electricity
than gas.

given that gas is one of the fuels that we use to make electricity, and
making electricity costs money

How much does wind cost?

it's simple economics that supply of manufactured electricity will cost
more than raw gas

That depends on how much the gas costs to find and extract. At one time it
was an unwanted by product of oil extraction. And may well still be
subsidised by that.

It's expecting anything else that is daft





--
*A conclusion is the place where you got tired of thinking *

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

In article ,
Max Demian wrote:
On 18/05/2021 13:41, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
tim... wrote:
"Jim GM4DHJ ..." wrote in message
...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-57149059

yup

banning gas boilers only makes any sense when 100% of UK electricity
production is carbon free

It can make sense to reduce local pollution.

until it is, simply transferring gas use to additional electric use is
just daft

What is daft is charging a higher price per kilowatt of electricity than
gas.

That's mostly down to the second law of thermodynamics.

Efficiency = (input temp - output temp)/(input temp) for a heat engine.

A gas power station is 30-50% efficient, the rest being waste heat
unless you can use it for something like district heating.

If that is the case, burning it directly to heat our homes etc makes more
sense.

--
*When it rains, why don't sheep shrink? *

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

On 19/05/2021 13:57, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Max Demian wrote:
On 18/05/2021 13:41, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
tim... wrote:
"Jim GM4DHJ ..." wrote in message
...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-57149059

yup

banning gas boilers only makes any sense when 100% of UK electricity
production is carbon free

It can make sense to reduce local pollution.

until it is, simply transferring gas use to additional electric use is
just daft

What is daft is charging a higher price per kilowatt of electricity than
gas.

That's mostly down to the second law of thermodynamics.

Efficiency = (input temp - output temp)/(input temp) for a heat engine.

A gas power station is 30-50% efficient, the rest being waste heat
unless you can use it for something like district heating.

If that is the case, burning it directly to heat our homes etc makes more
sense.

It always is unless a zero carbon way of generating electricity is used.

--
Max Demian

On 19/05/2021 23:16, Max Demian wrote:
On 19/05/2021 13:57, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Â*Â*Â* Max Demian wrote:
On 18/05/2021 13:41, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Â*Â*Â*Â* tim... wrote:
"Jim GM4DHJ ..." wrote in message
...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-57149059

yup

banning gas boilers only makes any sense when 100% of UK electricity
production is carbon free

It can make sense to reduce local pollution.

until it is, simply transferring gas use to additional electric use is
just daft

What is daft is charging a higher price per kilowatt of electricity
than
gas.

That's mostly down to the second law of thermodynamics.

Efficiency = (input temp - output temp)/(input temp) for a heat engine.

A gas power station is 30-50% efficient, the rest being waste heat
unless you can use it for something like district heating.

If that is the case, burning it directly to heat our homes etc makes more
sense.

It always is unless a zero carbon way of generating electricity is used.

The problem with wrong assumptions is that they lead to wrong answers

1. A gas power station is in the range of 40-70% efficient
2. Not all the heat from a heat pump comes from the electricity. A lot
of it comes from the air or soil outside
3. Not all the heat from a central heating boiler goes into the hot
water. Some goes out of the flue as hot gasses at slightly below 100C.

In reality a CCGT and a CH condensing boiler are both about 65%
(thermal) efficiency : the kicker is that heat pump is, in terms of heat
out to electricity in, at least 200%, and up to 400% 'efficient'.

That means that overall CCGT plus heat pump is a less energy intensive
heating solution than a gas boiler.

making your statement plain wrong




--
If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will
eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such
time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic
and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally
important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for
the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the
truth is the greatest enemy of the State.

Joseph Goebbels

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

In reality a CCGT and a CH condensing boiler are both about 65%
(thermal) efficiency : the kicker is that heat pump is, in terms of heat
out to electricity in, at least 200%, and up to 400% 'efficient'.

That means that overall CCGT plus heat pump is a less energy intensive
heating solution than a gas boiler.

How does that compare to a gas powered domestic heat pump? Presumably that
would out-perform CCGT + electric heat pump?

Tim




--
Please don't feed the trolls

On 20/05/2021 16:05, Tim+ wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:

In reality a CCGT and a CH condensing boiler are both about 65%
(thermal) efficiency : the kicker is that heat pump is, in terms of heat
out to electricity in, at least 200%, and up to 400% 'efficient'.

That means that overall CCGT plus heat pump is a less energy intensive
heating solution than a gas boiler.

How does that compare to a gas powered domestic heat pump? Presumably that
would out-perform CCGT + electric heat pump?

Tim




I would not have thought so. Otherwise we would all be using gas
fridges, not electric


--
No Apple devices were knowingly used in the preparation of this post.

On 20/05/2021 17:33, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 20/05/2021 16:05, Tim+ wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:

In reality a CCGT and a CH condensingÂ* boiler are both about 65%
(thermal) efficiency : the kicker is that heat pump is, in terms of heat
out to electricity in, at least 200%, and up to 400% 'efficient'.

That means that overall CCGT plus heat pump is a less energy intensive
heating solution than a gas boiler.

How does that compare to a gas powered domestic heat pump?Â* Presumably
that
would out-perform CCGT + electric heat pump?

Tim




I would not have thought so. Otherwise we would all be using gas
fridges, not electric


We don't use gas fridges because we don't (yet) have mini gas turbines
to drive the compressor. The old fashioned gas fridges were the
"absorption" type, much less efficient than modern ones.

When the CEGB was privatised, one of the managers was going to use his
redundancy payout to try to adapt lorry turbocharger technology to make
a "home" system to generate domestic electricity and use the waste heat
for DHW and central heating. I helped him to scrounge some laboratory
C&I stuff that was otherwise going into a skip for him to start making
prototypes. I guess it never got anywhere, but I was always slightly
sorry about that. It seemed to me to be a scheme with potential
(although probably better in colder climates with a more consistent CH
requirement).

On 20/05/2021 22:32, newshound wrote:
On 20/05/2021 17:33, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 20/05/2021 16:05, Tim+ wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:

In reality a CCGT and a CH condensingÂ* boiler are both about 65%
(thermal) efficiency : the kicker is that heat pump is, in terms of
heat
out to electricity in, at least 200%, and up to 400% 'efficient'.

That means that overall CCGT plus heat pump is a less energy intensive
heating solution than a gas boiler.

How does that compare to a gas powered domestic heat pump?
Presumably that
would out-perform CCGT + electric heat pump?

Tim




I would not have thought so. Otherwise we would all be using gas
fridges, not electric


We don't use gas fridges because we don't (yet) have mini gas turbines
to drive the compressor. The old fashioned gas fridges were the
"absorption" type, much less efficient than modern ones.

When the CEGB was privatised, one of the managers was going to use his
redundancy payout to try to adapt lorry turbocharger technology to make
a "home" system to generate domestic electricity and use the waste heat
for DHW and central heating. I helped him to scrounge some laboratory
C&I stuff that was otherwise going into a skip for him to start making
prototypes. I guess it never got anywhere, but I was always slightly
sorry about that. It seemed to me to be a scheme with potential
(although probably better in colder climates with a more consistent CH
requirement).

One of the problems with model plane gas turbines (jets) is that the
blade to cowl clearance has to be about the same as it is on a full size
jet, but proportionately this is a far larger percentage of the total
blade diameter, and this leads to serious loss of efficiency.

Pocket size gas turbines simply are not as good as big ones. Small may
be beautiful, but big is often better.

Remember that having ones own generator stopped being useful about the
time the last windmill stopped turning.

Before modern insanity set in

--
There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale
returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact.

Mark Twain

newshound wrote:
We don't use gas fridges because we don't (yet) have mini gas turbines
to drive the compressor. The old fashioned gas fridges were the
"absorption" type, much less efficient than modern ones.

And the primary advantage of electric heat pumps is you can run them off
renewables, which you couldn't do with a gas heat pump.

When the CEGB was privatised, one of the managers was going to use his
redundancy payout to try to adapt lorry turbocharger technology to make
a "home" system to generate domestic electricity and use the waste heat
for DHW and central heating. I helped him to scrounge some laboratory
C&I stuff that was otherwise going into a skip for him to start making
prototypes. I guess it never got anywhere, but I was always slightly
sorry about that. It seemed to me to be a scheme with potential
(although probably better in colder climates with a more consistent CH
requirement).

'Combined Heat and Power' is a thing you can buy today:
https://www.thegreenage.co.uk/tech/chp-boilers/

The problem is generally modulating down - they really want to be run full
blast, but that generates too much heat for a domestic setting. Even in
cold climates, you would be much better off insulating. They might be fine
for something like a swimming pool where there's a constant predictable
heat demand.

Theo

In article , Theo
wrote:
newshound wrote:
We don't use gas fridges because we don't (yet) have mini gas turbines
to drive the compressor. The old fashioned gas fridges were the
"absorption" type, much less efficient than modern ones.

And the primary advantage of electric heat pumps is you can run them off
renewables, which you couldn't do with a gas heat pump.

When the CEGB was privatised, one of the managers was going to use his
redundancy payout to try to adapt lorry turbocharger technology to make
a "home" system to generate domestic electricity and use the waste
heat for DHW and central heating. I helped him to scrounge some
laboratory C&I stuff that was otherwise going into a skip for him to
start making prototypes. I guess it never got anywhere, but I was
always slightly sorry about that. It seemed to me to be a scheme with
potential (although probably better in colder climates with a more
consistent CH requirement).

'Combined Heat and Power' is a thing you can buy today:
https://www.thegreenage.co.uk/tech/chp-boilers/

The problem is generally modulating down - they really want to be run
full blast, but that generates too much heat for a domestic setting.
Even in cold climates, you would be much better off insulating. They
might be fine for something like a swimming pool where there's a constant
predictable heat demand.

In its 1920s Portobello power station, Edinburgh used the waste heat to
warm up the sea water for the neighbouring open air swimming pool. Now both
have gone.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

On 21/05/2021 14:17, Theo wrote:
newshound wrote:
We don't use gas fridges because we don't (yet) have mini gas turbines
to drive the compressor. The old fashioned gas fridges were the
"absorption" type, much less efficient than modern ones.

And the primary advantage of electric heat pumps is you can run them off
renewables, which you couldn't do with a gas heat pump.

That is not an advantage

Everyone knows that the last thing we want in the world is unsustainable
'renewables'.





--
"Corbyn talks about equality, justice, opportunity, health care, peace,
community, compassion, investment, security, housing...."
"What kind of person is not interested in those things?"

"Jeremy Corbyn?"

On 21/05/2021 14:39, charles wrote:
In article , Theo
wrote:
newshound wrote:
We don't use gas fridges because we don't (yet) have mini gas turbines
to drive the compressor. The old fashioned gas fridges were the
"absorption" type, much less efficient than modern ones.

And the primary advantage of electric heat pumps is you can run them off
renewables, which you couldn't do with a gas heat pump.

When the CEGB was privatised, one of the managers was going to use his
redundancy payout to try to adapt lorry turbocharger technology to make
a "home" system to generate domestic electricity and use the waste
heat for DHW and central heating. I helped him to scrounge some
laboratory C&I stuff that was otherwise going into a skip for him to
start making prototypes. I guess it never got anywhere, but I was
always slightly sorry about that. It seemed to me to be a scheme with
potential (although probably better in colder climates with a more
consistent CH requirement).

'Combined Heat and Power' is a thing you can buy today:
https://www.thegreenage.co.uk/tech/chp-boilers/

The problem is generally modulating down - they really want to be run
full blast, but that generates too much heat for a domestic setting.
Even in cold climates, you would be much better off insulating. They
might be fine for something like a swimming pool where there's a constant
predictable heat demand.

In its 1920s Portobello power station, Edinburgh used the waste heat to
warm up the sea water for the neighbouring open air swimming pool. Now both
have gone.

Battersea power station ran its final condensate out to blocks of
flats...its the ideal location for a nuclear power station...rub
londoners noses in the fact that someone somewhere has to live next door
to a power station




--
"Corbyn talks about equality, justice, opportunity, health care, peace,
community, compassion, investment, security, housing...."
"What kind of person is not interested in those things?"

"Jeremy Corbyn?"

In article ,
charles wrote:
In its 1920s Portobello power station, Edinburgh used the waste heat to
warm up the sea water for the neighbouring open air swimming pool. Now
both have gone.

Didn't Battersea Power Station do the same for nearby housing estates?

--
*Any connection between your reality and mine is purely coincidental

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

Theo wrote:
newshound wrote:
We don't use gas fridges because we don't (yet) have mini gas turbines
to drive the compressor. The old fashioned gas fridges were the
"absorption" type, much less efficient than modern ones.

And the primary advantage of electric heat pumps is you can run them off
renewables, which you couldn't do with a gas heat pump.


Very true, but whats the cut off date for domestic gas supplies? Cant say
Ive ever heard one discussed.

So, *if* domestic gas supplies continue, the *cheapest* domestic heating
could be a gas powered heat pump depending on their efficiency and gas
prices.

Tim



--
Please don't feed the trolls

On Wed, 19 May 2021 08:17:59 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:



"Scott" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 18 May 2021 11:34:53 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:



"Jim GM4DHJ ..." wrote in message
...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-57149059

yup

banning gas boilers only makes any sense when 100% of UK electricity
production is carbon free

until it is, simply transferring gas use to additional electric use is
just
daft

Not following your line of thought here. AIUI gas boilers are 100%
gas and electricity generation is far less than 100% gas - and
declining..

Gas isn't the worst non-renewable

So, It isn't just the amount of electricity that's produced by gas that's
important, it's the amount that produced by anything that isn't renewable.

How much gas is produced by non-renewables and is this reducing over
time?

and whilst the amount of the current electricity demand is moving to
renewable, where's the supply for the 100% increase [1] in amount needed
when everybody move from gas to electric, going to come from?

It won't all be coming from gas.

[1] I use approx the same number of kWh of gas per year, space and water
heating, as I do electric on everything else. And I have a *very* well
insulated house.

On 18/05/2021 17:45, Brian Gaff (Sofa) wrote:
As I said in another thread, it won't happen, at least not at much of a
speed as everyone will get their boilers fitted before hand and its going to
be theier slow demise that they hope will allow time to ramp up generation,
but Unless they use portable nuclear I cannot see how, Turn the English
channel into a tidal power station perhaps? grin.
Brian

The basic problem, on top of the intermittency, is that tidal power
requires robust infrastructure to cope with weather extremes, so the
capital cost is high. A Severn Barrage would be rather like the Channel
Tunnel, not cost effective as a project but once built a great asset
because you could run a motorway and/or railway across it. Also, while
it would be great for sailors and other aquatic leisure activities, it's
not so good for Slimbrige and the birders.

On 19/05/2021 01:55 pm, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

[ ... ]

When the coroner in London ruled that the little girl who died a few
months ago was due to pollution, there was quite a local fuss. Of course
transport got the blame since she lived close to a busy main road, but
several different types of sources will have contributed to that pollution.

And unless lots of other people in the location where that unfortunate
girl lived are dropping like flies, falling victim to (only) the
self-same "pollution", then it was probably not the pollution which
killed her, though it might (or might not) have exacerbated whatever it was.

For a time when I was a boy, we used to live directly on the A59 in
central Liverpool, less than a hundred and fifty yards from the Mersey
Tunnel entrance. There were almost no emission controls in those days,
and as well as traffic (lots of it), we were surrounded by dwellings
burning coal in grates and various industrial premises, including a
nearby brewery, all doing the same.

We all managed to survive.

On 24/05/2021 17:49, JNugent wrote:
On 19/05/2021 01:55 pm, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

[ ... ]

When the coroner in London ruled that the little girl who died a few
months ago was due to pollution, there was quite a local fuss. Of course
transport got the blame since she lived close to a busy main road, but
several different types of sources will have contributed to that
pollution.

And unless lots of other people in the location where that unfortunate
girl lived are dropping like flies, falling victim to (only) the
self-same "pollution", then it was probably not the pollution which
killed her, though it might (or might not) have exacerbated whatever it
was.

For a time when I was a boy, we used to live directly on the A59 in
central Liverpool, less than a hundred and fifty yards from the Mersey
Tunnel entrance. There were almost no emission controls in those days,
and as well as traffic (lots of it), we were surrounded by dwellings
burning coal in grates and various industrial premises, including a
nearby brewery, all doing the same.

We all managed to survive.

I have thought it very odd that asthma rates have been rising, while
vehicle emission controls have been improving and and all forms of
vehicle pollution have actually been falling significantly, yet the
action seems to be to pillory the motorist, restrict when and where they
can drive and charge them punitive penalties for entering certain areas.

JNugent wrote:
We all managed to survive.

Of course, if anyone had actually died, they'd be
sure to post here and let us know they disagreed.

#Paul

In article ,
JNugent wrote:
On 19/05/2021 01:55 pm, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

[ ... ]

When the coroner in London ruled that the little girl who died a few
months ago was due to pollution, there was quite a local fuss. Of
course transport got the blame since she lived close to a busy main
road, but several different types of sources will have contributed to
that pollution.

And unless lots of other people in the location where that unfortunate
girl lived are dropping like flies, falling victim to (only) the
self-same "pollution", then it was probably not the pollution which
killed her, though it might (or might not) have exacerbated whatever it
was.

For a time when I was a boy, we used to live directly on the A59 in
central Liverpool, less than a hundred and fifty yards from the Mersey
Tunnel entrance. There were almost no emission controls in those days,
and as well as traffic (lots of it), we were surrounded by dwellings
burning coal in grates and various industrial premises, including a
nearby brewery, all doing the same.

We all managed to survive.

The human body can be damaged long term by some types of pollution, but
still 'survive'. And not all will be equally effected.

Lead was a prime example.

It's similar to Covid. 'I've not caught it, therefore all these
precautions are stupid, and disrupt my life'

--
*Pentium wise, pen and paper foolish *

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

On Tue, 25 May 2021 10:41:07 +0100, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
JNugent wrote:
On 19/05/2021 01:55 pm, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

[ ... ]

When the coroner in London ruled that the little girl who died a few
months ago was due to pollution, there was quite a local fuss. Of
course transport got the blame since she lived close to a busy main
road, but several different types of sources will have contributed to
that pollution.

And unless lots of other people in the location where that unfortunate
girl lived are dropping like flies, falling victim to (only) the
self-same "pollution", then it was probably not the pollution which
killed her, though it might (or might not) have exacerbated whatever it
was.

For a time when I was a boy, we used to live directly on the A59 in
central Liverpool, less than a hundred and fifty yards from the Mersey
Tunnel entrance. There were almost no emission controls in those days,
and as well as traffic (lots of it), we were surrounded by dwellings
burning coal in grates and various industrial premises, including a
nearby brewery, all doing the same.

We all managed to survive.

The human body can be damaged long term by some types of pollution, but
still 'survive'. And not all will be equally effected.

Lead was a prime example.

It's similar to Covid. 'I've not caught it, therefore all these
precautions are stupid, and disrupt my life'


Especially some immigrants who may come from a relatively simple life
style and with genes not adapted to cope with the environment they find
themselves in.

On 24/05/2021 19:23, Steve Walker wrote:
On 24/05/2021 17:49, JNugent wrote:
On 19/05/2021 01:55 pm, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

[ ... ]

When the coroner in London ruled that the little girl who died a few
months ago was due to pollution, there was quite a local fuss. Of course
transport got the blame since she lived close to a busy main road, but
several different types of sources will have contributed to that
pollution.

And unless lots of other people in the location where that unfortunate
girl lived are dropping like flies, falling victim to (only) the
self-same "pollution", then it was probably not the pollution which
killed her, though it might (or might not) have exacerbated whatever
it was.

For a time when I was a boy, we used to live directly on the A59 in
central Liverpool, less than a hundred and fifty yards from the Mersey
Tunnel entrance. There were almost no emission controls in those days,
and as well as traffic (lots of it), we were surrounded by dwellings
burning coal in grates and various industrial premises, including a
nearby brewery, all doing the same.

We all managed to survive.

I have thought it very odd that asthma rates have been rising,

While it's anecdotal evidence, I have known a few friends who gave up
smoking to then suffer from asthma. In one case their doctor said it's
no an unusual consequence.

while
vehicle emission controls have been improving and and all forms of
vehicle pollution have actually been falling significantly, yet the
action seems to be to pillory the motorist, restrict when and where they
can drive and charge them punitive penalties for entering certain areas.

An interesting observation.

On 24/05/2021 19:23, Steve Walker wrote:
On 24/05/2021 17:49, JNugent wrote:
On 19/05/2021 01:55 pm, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

[ ... ]

When the coroner in London ruled that the little girl who died a few
months ago was due to pollution, there was quite a local fuss. Of course
transport got the blame since she lived close to a busy main road, but
several different types of sources will have contributed to that
pollution.

And unless lots of other people in the location where that unfortunate
girl lived are dropping like flies, falling victim to (only) the
self-same "pollution", then it was probably not the pollution which
killed her, though it might (or might not) have exacerbated whatever
it was.

For a time when I was a boy, we used to live directly on the A59 in
central Liverpool, less than a hundred and fifty yards from the Mersey
Tunnel entrance. There were almost no emission controls in those days,
and as well as traffic (lots of it), we were surrounded by dwellings
burning coal in grates and various industrial premises, including a
nearby brewery, all doing the same.

We all managed to survive.

I have thought it very odd that asthma rates have been rising, while
vehicle emission controls have been improving and and all forms of
vehicle pollution have actually been falling significantly, yet the
action seems to be to pillory the motorist, restrict when and where they
can drive and charge them punitive penalties for entering certain areas.

You only need to walk along the side of a busy road to notice the pong
on NO2. This wasn't the case 20 years ago. Now There are 10+ million
diesel engined cars on the road and the vast majority are not EU6
compliant. There needs a massive cull of older diesel clunkers.

On 25/05/2021 10:41, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
JNugent wrote:
On 19/05/2021 01:55 pm, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

[ ... ]

When the coroner in London ruled that the little girl who died a few
months ago was due to pollution, there was quite a local fuss. Of
course transport got the blame since she lived close to a busy main
road, but several different types of sources will have contributed to
that pollution.

And unless lots of other people in the location where that unfortunate
girl lived are dropping like flies, falling victim to (only) the
self-same "pollution", then it was probably not the pollution which
killed her, though it might (or might not) have exacerbated whatever it
was.

For a time when I was a boy, we used to live directly on the A59 in
central Liverpool, less than a hundred and fifty yards from the Mersey
Tunnel entrance. There were almost no emission controls in those days,
and as well as traffic (lots of it), we were surrounded by dwellings
burning coal in grates and various industrial premises, including a
nearby brewery, all doing the same.

We all managed to survive.

The human body can be damaged long term by some types of pollution, but
still 'survive'. And not all will be equally effected.

Lead was a prime example.

It's similar to Covid. 'I've not caught it, therefore all these
precautions are stupid, and disrupt my life'


How do you know you didn't 'catch it' ?. Lots of people get no
symptoms and not just young people.