I was looking at changing my 18 year old central heating boiler for a
new more energency efficient condenser boiler.

I am not so keen having read the following BBC News article:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4026139.stm

Who's right?

Graham

wrote:
I was looking at changing my 18 year old central heating boiler for a
new more energency efficient condenser boiler.

I am not so keen having read the following BBC News article:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4026139.stm

Who's right?


While I'm usually very much in agreement with the author's sentiments
(it's much 'greener' to drive a 10 year old car than to buy a brand new,
more efficient one), the sums don't add up when it comes to boilers.

Boilers convert a lot of energy in a year, yet don't cost a great deal
of energy to manufacture and service. So, only a small increase in
efficieny is required in order to make a big difference to the amount of
fuel used to produce the same amount of energy.

That's not to say you should replace your boiler every two years with
the latest, most efficient model. Just that when you come to replace
your boiler at the end of its natural life, get the most efficient one
you can, made by a reputable manufacturer.

--
Grunff

wrote in message
news
I was looking at changing my 18 year old central heating boiler for a
new more energency efficient condenser boiler.

I am not so keen having read the following BBC News article:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4026139.stm

Who's right?

Jeff Howell is a know-it-all jack-of-all-trades pillock, who has made a name
for himself in crap newspaper prattling ill-informed garbage most of the
time.

Let's see what the fools says....


"At its most basic, a boiler is simply a kettle. It is a cast iron vessel,
with a burner underneath it. We've had boilers like this for 30, 40, 50
years. And in some cases those original 50 year old boilers are still
working very well,"


I know of "no" 50 year old boiler still operating, domestic or commercial.
He is on about domestic boilers here. I know of no 50 years old boiler in
any house. He may actually know of one and is attempting pass this one
boiler off as the norm.

Most new boilers are not cast-iron, that is how much this pillock knows.

The fools goes on.....


"In order to get this extra alleged 15% of efficiency out of the new
boilers, they become far more complicated. They are full of sensors,
electronics, gauges and electronic ignition systems which makes them so
complicated that they require a university engineering degree almost in
order to maintain them."


Total balls. They are 15% more efficient to the best regular boiler. They
are around 40% more efficient to his cast-iron garbage. Not all condensing
boilers are full of sensors and electronics. The Glow-Worm heating boiler
is basic and has a stainless steel heat exchanger. Most manufacturers make
simple boilers like this. An average boiler service man can maintain any
condensing boiler. The only difference between a non-condesning boioer and
a condesning is that one has a largere heat excahnger and a plastic drain
pipe. Big deal eh!!!!

The prat continues.....


Mr Howell is convinced these new boilers will fail quicker and use up more
energy in their manufacture, maintenance and disposal, than might be saved
during the boiler's working life. "New condensing boilers have to be
maintained by a skilled engineer at least every six months. Every time the
engineer comes, he drives his diesel van. He sits in the traffic trying to
get to your house. These are all extra energy costs involved,"


SIX MONTHS!!! Total crap!!! Since my condensing boiler was new "nothing"
has gone wrong. Just the once a year service. A neighbour never had their
condensing boiler serviced for 4 years and nothing went wrong.

Every boiler has to be maintained by a skilled engineer. He is making out
that non-condensers don't require skilled engineers to maintain and service
them.

Again the fool rabbits on....


he says. "Anything that has electronics in it is going to require more
energy costs in dismantling and disposal of it. Printed circuit boards all
contain toxic materials, for example, and you'd have to spend extra energy
in separating out the cadmium and the cobalt and the other heavy metals."


Que Maxie...


"If you're talking about sustainability in building, then the most
sustainable thing is to keep what you've got," he says.


Crap!!! If it is inefficient do the payback calcs and replace. Condensing
boilers make sense. Lots of sense.

I'm Howel-ing with laughter. This fool needs doing to him what those in
snotty uni's do to each other.

Problem is condensing boilers are now and will be the only boiler you can
legally fit! {2005}
Another sign of the NANNY STATE.
And if you think that is bad, No more DIY electrical next year take a look
at www.a2znorthants.co.uk and click on part P
Regards John
wrote in message
news
I was looking at changing my 18 year old central heating boiler for a
new more energency efficient condenser boiler.

I am not so keen having read the following BBC News article:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4026139.stm

Who's right?

Graham

On Mon, 22 Nov 2004 19:17:02 GMT, wrote:

I was looking at changing my 18 year old central heating boiler for a
new more energency efficient condenser boiler.

I am not so keen having read the following BBC News article:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4026139.stm

Who's right?

Graham


Howell:

"At its most basic, a boiler is simply a kettle. It is a cast iron
vessel, with a burner underneath it. We've had boilers like this for
30, 40, 50 years. And in some cases those original 50 year old boilers
are still working very well," he says. "

Boilers do not by any stretch of the imagination, all have cast iron
heat exchangers. Relatively few introduced in the last few years use
cast iron. For at least ten years, probably more, many have low water
content heat exchangers made from metals ranging from aluminium to
stainless steel. THese are more efficient for a number of reasons
including less loss of heat through the flue.

A significant number of the older cast iron products went off the
market a few years back when minimum efficiency standards were set to
78% seasonal efficiency. Having said that, quite a number of low
water content products went at the time as well.

When he says "working very well" that rather depends on definitions.
The 30-50 year old products in cast iron are unlikely to be achieving
more than around 50% seasonal efficiency. Low water content types
of around 15 years ago can manage around 65%.

Howell:

"In order to get this extra alleged 15% of efficiency out of the new
boilers, they become far more complicated. They are full of sensors,
electronics, gauges and electronic ignition systems which makes them
so complicated that they require a university engineering degree
almost in order to maintain them."

Most boilers released on the market in the last 5-10 years have
sensors and electronics to control them, be they condensing or not.
In most designs the components are plug fit and easy to replace.
There are certainly pups as designs, but that has always been the
case. Electronic ignition systems have been in use since the mid
70s.

Condensing boilers operate with a seasonal efficiency of 90% or so; so
for Howell's 15% to hold, he would have to be comparing with the best
of the non condensing designs which are, themselves, electronically
controlled for the most part.

He can't have it both ways.

Two years ago, I replaced an old Glow Worm low wwater content boiler
(65% seasonal efficient) with a condensing unit. THe saving in gas
has been between 25 and 30%.


Howell:

"New condensing boilers have to be maintained by a skilled engineer at
least every six months. Every time the engineer comes, he drives his
diesel van. He sits in the traffic trying to get to your house. These
are all extra energy costs involved," he says.

The maintenance interval recommended for every condensing boiler that
I have seen is annual, certainly not every six months, so this
argument falls apart immediately.


"Anything that has electronics in it is going to require more energy
costs in dismantling and disposal of it. Printed circuit boards all
contain toxic materials, for example, and you'd have to spend extra
energy in separating out the cadmium and the cobalt and the other
heavy metals."

This is a thin argument. Every increasing regulation on materials
in electronic components is making disposal less and less of an issue.

Vaillant:

"If you were to ask any manufacturer, you would typically get the
response that annual servicing of any gas appliance is a very good
idea to ensure it's operating at peak efficiency and to ensure there
are no issues developing during the course of the intervening year,"
says Vaillant's marketing director, John Collins.

This is correct and is what most manufacturers say. As a minimum, a
flue gas analysis should be done for any boiler.

"Condensing boilers don't require any more maintenance than any other
type of boiler. Typical servicing requirements are exactly the same
for both. And the only difference really with a high-efficiency
condensing boiler is it has a condensing drain."

This is also correct if the comparison is with modern non-condensing
models.


"It's because it's cooling the products of combustion down to a much
lower level, the water vapour contained in those products is condensed
out in the boiler itself and so there is a small drain in the boiler
to allow that condensate water to be piped away to a convenient drain
in the house. Part of the service would be to ensure that drain was
clear."

True - among other things.

"As a company we are very much geared to looking to the future and
looking to rationalise the use of energy by every possible technology.

He's a marketing guy :-)

having said that, Vaillant are one of the better makes and have been
producing condensing boilers for over 20 years.

It is true that early UK designs had problems, and this was because
they were designed by adding a bolt on condensing heat exchanger to an
old design. Poor design and inappropriate materials led to corrosion.

Modern designs deal with condensate correctly and do not have these
issues.

You can change your old boiler to a new condensing one with
confidence, but do make sure that you buy a good quality one.



--

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

In article ,
writes
I was looking at changing my 18 year old central heating boiler for a
new more energency efficient condenser boiler.

I am not so keen having read the following BBC News article:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4026139.stm

Who's right?

Graham



Well sadly the BBC isn't the trustworthy organisation I once believed it
was;(

--
Tony Sayer

"dms1.go-plus.net" wrote in message
...

Problem is condensing boilers are now and will be the only boiler you can
legally fit! {2005}
Another sign of the NANNY STATE.

Another brainwahsed Tory voter. Voting for them will do you no good.

"tony sayer" wrote in message
...
In article ,
writes
I was looking at changing my 18 year old central heating boiler for a
new more energency efficient condenser boiler.

I am not so keen having read the following BBC News article:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4026139.stm

Who's right?

Graham



Well sadly the BBC isn't the trustworthy organisation I once believed it
was;(

Neither is the Torygraph (which never was a trustworthy organisation) which
gives this Howell pillock shouting space.

Neither is the Torygraph (which never was a trustworthy organisation) =
which
gives this Howell pillock shouting space.
=20
From his website: http://www.ask-jeff.co.uk/

Who is Jeff Howell?
I am a bricklayer by trade

:-)

"Graeme" wrote in message
...
Neither is the Torygraph (which never was a trustworthy organisation)
which
gives this Howell pillock shouting space.

From his website: http://www.ask-jeff.co.uk/

Who is Jeff Howell?
I am a bricklayer by trade

some jobbing crank it appears, who passes himself off as an expert engineer
on most things buildings.

In message , IMM writes

he says. "Anything that has electronics in it is going to require more
energy costs in dismantling and disposal of it. Printed circuit boards all
contain toxic materials, for example, and you'd have to spend extra energy
in separating out the cadmium and the cobalt and the other heavy metals."


Que Maxie...

I presume you meant "Cue" there

--
geoff

In article ,
tony sayer wrote:
Well sadly the BBC isn't the trustworthy organisation I once believed it
was;(

But they're quoting someone. And quoting an opposite view from a maker.

--
*I started out with nothing... and I still have most of it.

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

In article ,
raden wrote:
Que Maxie...

I presume you meant "Cue" there

Or Q if you're a pro. ;-)

--
*Two many clicks spoil the browse *

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

wrote in message
news
I was looking at changing my 18 year old central heating boiler for a
new more energency efficient condenser boiler.

I am not so keen having read the following BBC News article:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4026139.stm

Who's right?

Graham

I have had an oil condensing boiler for 10 years and apart from the annual
service has given me trouble free service. My house is a bungalow and my oil
bills for the last 10 years have worked out at an average of £240 for full
central heating and hot water.
Blair

"raden" wrote in message
...
In message , IMM writes

he says. "Anything that has electronics in it is going to require more
energy costs in dismantling and disposal of it. Printed circuit boards
all
contain toxic materials, for example, and you'd have to spend extra
energy
in separating out the cadmium and the cobalt and the other heavy metals."


Que Maxie...

I presume you meant "Cue" there

Maxie, no I meant Que.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
tony sayer wrote:
Well sadly the BBC isn't the trustworthy organisation I once believed it
was;(

But they're quoting someone. And quoting an opposite view from a maker.

They are checking the main points for validity to begin with. Duh!

Grunff wrote:
wrote:
I was looking at changing my 18 year old central heating boiler for a
new more energency efficient condenser boiler.

I am not so keen having read the following BBC News article:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4026139.stm

Who's right?


While I'm usually very much in agreement with the author's sentiments
(it's much 'greener' to drive a 10 year old car than to buy a brand new,
more efficient one), the sums don't add up when it comes to boilers.

Boilers convert a lot of energy in a year, yet don't cost a great deal
of energy to manufacture and service. So, only a small increase in
efficieny is required in order to make a big difference to the amount of
fuel used to produce the same amount of energy.

That's not to say you should replace your boiler every two years with
the latest, most efficient model. Just that when you come to replace
your boiler at the end of its natural life, get the most efficient one
you can, made by a reputable manufacturer.

What I think is *really* significant about the article is the slipped
in note that 20% of UK fuel consumption is in our houses. Thus even if
our boilers' efficiency is improved nationwide by, say, 20%, that will
only save an absolute maximum of 4% on our overall energy consumption.
(That may not be quite right, it depends a bit on the typical efficiency
at the moment but it gives the sort of order of magnitude involved)

It'll be still less because we don't all use gas boilers and because
other energy losses won't be affected by changing the boiler.

If 80% of our energy is used by industry then that is where most
efforts should be applied, or maybe it's transport.

--
Chris Green

wrote in message
news
I was looking at changing my 18 year old central heating boiler for a
new more energency efficient condenser boiler.

I am not so keen having read the following BBC News article:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4026139.stm

Who's right?


I'm not sure that a condenser circa 2004 will be necessarily any more
complex nor problematic than an equivalent non-condenser, so it's a bit of a
non-issue when choosing a boiler today. I expect that in 15 years time
there will probably be a fair number of current vintage Vaillants et al
going strong.

He does have a point in all that, but it's not well argued, or misguided in
it's reasoning (shades of Clarkson here?) - it'd certainly be good to see a
single figure for Total Lifecycle Cost for a whole number of products,
including manufacture energy costs, distribution & installation, cost of
expected manufacture for parts required over expected lifetime, and eventual
disposal costs. This would have to be added to running energy consumption,
and you might have a basis for equivalent comparison of differing designs of
boilers vs their efficiency (& could in fact also be done for the ancient
cast-iron inefficient lumps). Don't expect to see such a thing soon,
though...

BTW, did anyone hear Howell on You and Yours last week trying to argue
against Part P? Frustrating in the extreme, I was shouting at the radio.
YAY is just crap, though....


--
Richard Sampson

mail me at
richard at olifant d-ot co do-t uk

wrote in message ...
Grunff wrote:
wrote:
snip

That's not to say you should replace your boiler every two years with
the latest, most efficient model. Just that when you come to replace
your boiler at the end of its natural life, get the most efficient one
you can, made by a reputable manufacturer.

What I think is *really* significant about the article is the slipped
in note that 20% of UK fuel consumption is in our houses. Thus even if
our boilers' efficiency is improved nationwide by, say, 20%, that will
only save an absolute maximum of 4% on our overall energy consumption.
(That may not be quite right, it depends a bit on the typical efficiency
at the moment but it gives the sort of order of magnitude involved)

It'll be still less because we don't all use gas boilers and because
other energy losses won't be affected by changing the boiler.

If 80% of our energy is used by industry then that is where most
efforts should be applied, or maybe it's transport.


P'raps a significant amount is also used pulling down old buildings and
manufacturing/putting up new energy efficient ones... ;-)


--
Richard Sampson

mail me at
richard at olifant d-ot co do-t uk

wrote in message ...
Grunff wrote:
wrote:
I was looking at changing my 18 year old central heating boiler for a
new more energency efficient condenser boiler.

I am not so keen having read the following BBC News article:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4026139.stm

Who's right?


While I'm usually very much in agreement with the author's sentiments
(it's much 'greener' to drive a 10 year old car than to buy a brand new,
more efficient one), the sums don't add up when it comes to boilers.

Boilers convert a lot of energy in a year, yet don't cost a great deal
of energy to manufacture and service. So, only a small increase in
efficieny is required in order to make a big difference to the amount of
fuel used to produce the same amount of energy.

That's not to say you should replace your boiler every two years with
the latest, most efficient model. Just that when you come to replace
your boiler at the end of its natural life, get the most efficient one
you can, made by a reputable manufacturer.

What I think is *really* significant about the article is the slipped
in note that 20% of UK fuel consumption is in our houses.

I think you may find it is nearer to 40% all told in homes.

In article , Andy
Hall wrote:
"Condensing boilers don't require any more maintenance than
any other type of boiler. Typical servicing requirements are
exactly the same for both. And the only difference really
with a high-efficiency condensing boiler is it has a
condensing drain."

Arguably, if you've got the kit, they are quicker and easier to
service. The advice from a Keston engineer was that if the flue
gas numbers are OK leave well alone, just clean out the
condensate trap and check the igniter. With an upfiring boiler
you really do need to dismantle and brush all the crud out of
the burner.

Meanwhile hundreds of thousands of people will have read Jeff
Howell's comments and be believing them, thinking him an expert
on boilers rather than a bricklayer which IIRC is his trade.

--
Tony Bryer SDA UK 'Software to build on' http://www.sda.co.uk
Free SEDBUK boiler database browser
http://www.sda.co.uk/qsedbuk.htm

"RichardS" noone@invalid wrote in message
.. .

wrote in message ...
Grunff wrote:
wrote:
snip

That's not to say you should replace your boiler every two years with
the latest, most efficient model. Just that when you come to replace
your boiler at the end of its natural life, get the most efficient one
you can, made by a reputable manufacturer.

What I think is *really* significant about the article is the slipped
in note that 20% of UK fuel consumption is in our houses. Thus even if
our boilers' efficiency is improved nationwide by, say, 20%, that will
only save an absolute maximum of 4% on our overall energy consumption.
(That may not be quite right, it depends a bit on the typical efficiency
at the moment but it gives the sort of order of magnitude involved)

It'll be still less because we don't all use gas boilers and because
other energy losses won't be affected by changing the boiler.

If 80% of our energy is used by industry then that is where most
efforts should be applied, or maybe it's transport.


P'raps a significant amount is also used pulling down old buildings and
manufacturing/putting up new energy efficient ones... ;-)

Old bricks and slate tiles are re-cycled.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote
| raden wrote:
| Que Maxie...
| I presume you meant "Cue" there
| Or Q if you're a pro. ;-)

Kew if you come from Richmond

Owain

On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 15:28:45 -0000, "Owain"
wrote:

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote
| raden wrote:
| Que Maxie...
| I presume you meant "Cue" there
| Or Q if you're a pro. ;-)

Kew if you come from Richmond

Owain

Or "queue" if your French or waiting for a public service.



--

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

On 23 Nov 2004 10:06:05 GMT, wrote:


If 80% of our energy is used by industry then that is where most
efforts should be applied, or maybe it's transport.

I think it depends on what you mean by "energy".

If you look at electricity, it is estimated that a power cut is most
likely of a winter week day evening during the tail end of the rush
hour.

Graham

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

Luckily, he has a BG service contract otherwise those savings would have
been more than lost in repairs.

Isn't the cost of the service contract greater than the savings?

Regards
Capitol

In message , Andy Hall
writes
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 15:28:45 -0000, "Owain"
wrote:

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote
| raden wrote:
| Que Maxie...
| I presume you meant "Cue" there
| Or Q if you're a pro. ;-)

Kew if you come from Richmond

Owain

Or "queue" if your French or waiting for a public service.

Que ??

--
geoff

In message , IMM writes

"raden" wrote in message
...
In message , IMM writes

he says. "Anything that has electronics in it is going to require more
energy costs in dismantling and disposal of it. Printed circuit boards
all
contain toxic materials, for example, and you'd have to spend extra
energy
in separating out the cadmium and the cobalt and the other heavy metals."


Que Maxie...

I presume you meant "Cue" there

Maxie, no I meant Que.

Can you explain exactly what you mean by "Que" ?

because I don't understand what you are trying to say

--
geoff

In article ,
Capitol wrote:
Luckily, he has a BG service contract otherwise those savings would
have been more than lost in repairs.

Isn't the cost of the service contract greater than the savings?

Yes - but he reckons he gets value out of it - because he's always had it.

They've replaced rusted out rads - no inhibitor - and several repairs to
the old system too. My theory is it's because of the damage they did at
service time - nothing was ever put back together properly. Think the
pumps rarely lasted more than about 3 years - 3 way valves the same.

--
*TEAMWORK...means never having to take all the blame yourself *

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

"raden" wrote in message
...
In message , IMM writes

"raden" wrote in message
...
In message , IMM
writes

he says. "Anything that has electronics in it is going to require more
energy costs in dismantling and disposal of it. Printed circuit boards
all
contain toxic materials, for example, and you'd have to spend extra
energy
in separating out the cadmium and the cobalt and the other heavy
metals."


Que Maxie...

I presume you meant "Cue" there

Maxie, no I meant Que.

Can you explain exactly what you mean by "Que" ?

because I don't understand what you are trying to say

Que?

On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 01:00:14 -0000, "IMM" wrote:


"raden" wrote in message
...
In message , IMM writes

"raden" wrote in message
...
In message , IMM
writes

he says. "Anything that has electronics in it is going to require more
energy costs in dismantling and disposal of it. Printed circuit boards
all
contain toxic materials, for example, and you'd have to spend extra
energy
in separating out the cadmium and the cobalt and the other heavy
metals."


Que Maxie...

I presume you meant "Cue" there

Maxie, no I meant Que.

Can you explain exactly what you mean by "Que" ?

because I don't understand what you are trying to say

Que?

I thought that you were from Milton Keynes, not Barcelona.



--

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 01:00:14 -0000, "IMM" wrote:


"raden" wrote in message
...
In message , IMM
writes

"raden" wrote in message
...
In message , IMM
writes

he says. "Anything that has electronics in it is going to require
more
energy costs in dismantling and disposal of it. Printed circuit
boards
all
contain toxic materials, for example, and you'd have to spend extra
energy
in separating out the cadmium and the cobalt and the other heavy
metals."


Que Maxie...

I presume you meant "Cue" there

Maxie, no I meant Que.

Can you explain exactly what you mean by "Que" ?

because I don't understand what you are trying to say

Que?

I thought that you were from Milton Keynes, not Barcelona.

From both..an international man............

In article ,
Andy Hall wrote:
I thought that you were from Milton Keynes, not Barcelona.

I passed by MK today on my way to Leighton Buzzard. And again on the way
back. It's the best solution.

--
*i souport publik edekashun.

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

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Andy Hall wrote:
I thought that you were from Milton Keynes, not Barcelona.

I passed by MK today on my way to Leighton Buzzard. And again on the way
back. It's the best solution.

Great solution for the good peoplel of MK, but what have the people in L
Buzzard done that is so bad?

wrote:
On 23 Nov 2004 10:06:05 GMT, wrote:


If 80% of our energy is used by industry then that is where most
efforts should be applied, or maybe it's transport.

I think it depends on what you mean by "energy".

That which consumes resources, maybe you can argue that nuclear power
and other non-hydrocarbon sources don't consume resources but you know
what I mean.

If the 20%/80% split is right then I assume it means that 80% of our
consumption of gas/oil/electricity is industrial. There's a bit of a
'grey area' in that a lot of our electricity is generated using gas
and oil so whether that is industrial or domestic use is open to
debate.


If you look at electricity, it is estimated that a power cut is most
likely of a winter week day evening during the tail end of the rush
hour.

So how does this bear on the question?

--
Chris Green

In article , Capitol wrote:
Luckily, he has a BG service contract otherwise those savings
would have been more than lost in repairs.

Isn't the cost of the service contract greater than the savings?

"I had a Potterton Envoy that was installed by the builder when the
house was new 6 years ago. Problems began six months down the line
and after the warranty ran out, I tried to get a BG service contract
(yes I know!), but BG condemned the boiler and confirmed in writing
that they would not take on a contract."

From a post by one ColinM here 2003-11-24 located through Google
groups. When BG can't make money from a service contract you know
that a boiler is bad news!

--
Tony Bryer SDA UK 'Software to build on' http://www.sda.co.uk
Free SEDBUK boiler database browser http://www.sda.co.uk/qsedbuk.htm

In article , Tony Bryer
writes
In article , Capitol wrote:
Luckily, he has a BG service contract otherwise those savings
would have been more than lost in repairs.

Isn't the cost of the service contract greater than the savings?

"I had a Potterton Envoy that was installed by the builder when the
house was new 6 years ago. Problems began six months down the line
and after the warranty ran out, I tried to get a BG service contract
(yes I know!), but BG condemned the boiler and confirmed in writing
that they would not take on a contract."

From a post by one ColinM here 2003-11-24 located through Google
groups. When BG can't make money from a service contract you know
that a boiler is bad news!


Do they cover Suprima's;?......

--
Tony Sayer

IMM wrote:
"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...

On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 01:00:14 -0000, "IMM" wrote:


"raden" wrote in message
...

In message , IMM

writes

"raden" wrote in message
...

In message , IMM

writes

he says. "Anything that has electronics in it is going to require

more

energy costs in dismantling and disposal of it. Printed circuit

boards

all

contain toxic materials, for example, and you'd have to spend extra

energy

in separating out the cadmium and the cobalt and the other heavy

metals."



Que Maxie...


I presume you meant "Cue" there

Maxie, no I meant Que.


Can you explain exactly what you mean by "Que" ?

because I don't understand what you are trying to say

Que?


I thought that you were from Milton Keynes, not Barcelona.


From both..an international man............



Ahhh Manuel.... a step up from waiting tables in Torquay :-)

"Tony Bryer" wrote in message
...
In article , Capitol wrote:
Luckily, he has a BG service contract otherwise those savings
would have been more than lost in repairs.

Isn't the cost of the service contract greater than the savings?

"I had a Potterton Envoy that was installed by the builder when the
house was new 6 years ago. Problems began six months down the line
and after the warranty ran out, I tried to get a BG service contract
(yes I know!), but BG condemned the boiler and confirmed in writing
that they would not take on a contract."

"condemned"? Under what grounds? You can only condemn on safety grounds,
not because the boiler is potentially uneconomical for their service
contracts.

From a post by one ColinM here 2003-11-24 located through Google
groups. When BG can't make money from a service contract you know
that a boiler is bad news!

--
Tony Bryer SDA UK 'Software to build on' http://www.sda.co.uk
Free SEDBUK boiler database browser http://www.sda.co.uk/qsedbuk.htm

In article ,
Tony Bryer wrote:
Luckily, he has a BG service contract otherwise those savings
would have been more than lost in repairs.

Isn't the cost of the service contract greater than the savings?

"I had a Potterton Envoy that was installed by the builder when the
house was new 6 years ago. Problems began six months down the line
and after the warranty ran out, I tried to get a BG service contract
(yes I know!), but BG condemned the boiler and confirmed in writing
that they would not take on a contract."

Probably due to the money they've spent repairing my brother's one. ;-)

--
*Never kick a cow pat on a hot day *

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