Good morning
I'm thinking of buying a house that needs a lot doing to it. One of those
things is central heating. It's in an area without gas so I suppose the
choices are oil or electricity. Is there a website perhaps which will help
me decide? I believe that normally oil is cheaper, but I have oil in my
present house and am irritated by the variations in price every time I ring
up as well as the need to ring a range of suppliers, I'm irritated also by
the eyesore of a tank in the garden, and also by the need to keep an eye on
levels - why didn't I ring up several weeks ago now I'm snowed in!! But the
boiler works well and keeps us warm. On the other hand electricity would be
easier to install but possibly with prohibitively expensive continuing
costs. I am tempted though by the 'green' electricity you can get, I like
the thought of being able to be at least a bit environmentally friendly.

Has anyone else gone through this kind of decision making recently and can
help me weigh up the pros and cons?

thanks

jen

"J Ashton" wrote in message
...
Good morning
I'm thinking of buying a house that needs a lot doing to it. One of those
things is central heating. It's in an area without gas so I suppose the
choices are oil or electricity. Is there a website perhaps which will
help
me decide? I believe that normally oil is cheaper, but I have oil in my
present house and am irritated by the variations in price every time I
ring
up as well as the need to ring a range of suppliers, I'm irritated also by
the eyesore of a tank in the garden, and also by the need to keep an eye
on
levels - why didn't I ring up several weeks ago now I'm snowed in!! But
the
boiler works well and keeps us warm. On the other hand electricity would
be
easier to install but possibly with prohibitively expensive continuing
costs. I am tempted though by the 'green' electricity you can get, I like
the thought of being able to be at least a bit environmentally friendly.

Has anyone else gone through this kind of decision making recently and can
help me weigh up the pros and cons?

Yes. We opted for an Ice Energy ground heat pump (www.iceenergy.co.uk) -
nothing visible, highly efficient (payback is about 5 years in a well
insulated hgouse), government grant under the "blue skies" scheme to offset
some of the initial outlay, easy to install, works day or night,
summer/winter, cloudy/clear and even (like today) when there is a decent
amount of snow on it.

Not only is it a "green" way of heating, we buy the electricity from a
"green" supplier. Mind you, we have a largish lawn that can take 3 x 50M
long by 2M deep trenches that the coils were installed in - not visible once
backfilled and grassed.

No maintenance - its a seled unit with a 25-year life... and although these
units are newish in the uK, they've been installing 10s of 1000s of them in
Sweden (and elsewhere) for many many years.

"Ade the Builder" has an identical system http://www.adethebuilder.co.uk/
and is very pleased with it.

Mike

On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 10:22:10 -0000, J Ashton wrote:

I have oil in my present house and am irritated by the variations in
price every time I ring up as well as the need to ring a range of
suppliers,

Price fluctations are a pain but I've found very little difference in
price with the suppliers up here and the one I have an account with
will "price match" a little.

I'm irritated also by the eyesore of a tank in the garden,

Bury it, but that may bring a whole raft of enviromental protection
regulations. As you are doing up a place whack in as much insulation
as you can to reduce the energy demand for space heating and thus you
won't need a huge tank. Also a trellis around it with a climber of
some sort will hide it.

and also by the need to keep an eye on levels - why didn't I ring up
several weeks ago now I'm snowed in!!

Get an "Oil Watchman" device that fits to the tank and sends a radio
signal to a plugin device inside that shows a number relating to the
oil level. Personally I have but 1cm marks on the sight tube and I
check it every week end. Put the number into a spreadsheet and
extrapolate when we can expect to run out. At this time of year it's
frighteningly soon ater a refill but as the weather warms up it
extends out to the end of the summer. B-)

On the other hand electricity would be easier to install but
possibly with prohibitively expensive continuing costs.

Very much so and if you have a power cut no heat... At least an oil
fired system could be connected to a generator. Electricity to be even
half economic uses storage radiators, these have a nasty habit of
giving out their heat during the day (no one home?) and running out in
the evening if you get a sudden cold spell. Yes, they have controls
for heat in/out but they are manual and generally not particulary user
friendly. There maybe ones with time based automatic controls these
days but I can't see how they can help with the weather sudden going
cold. (or warm, heat up more than required costing money).

I am tempted though by the 'green' electricity you can get, I like
the thought of being able to be at least a bit environmentally
friendly.

"Green" stuff costs more than "normal"...

--
Cheers
Dave. pam is missing e-mail

On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 10:22:10 -0000, "J Ashton"
wrote:

Good morning
I'm thinking of buying a house that needs a lot doing to it. One of those
things is central heating. It's in an area without gas so I suppose the
choices are oil or electricity. Is there a website perhaps which will help
me decide? I believe that normally oil is cheaper, but I have oil in my
present house and am irritated by the variations in price every time I ring
up as well as the need to ring a range of suppliers, I'm irritated also by
the eyesore of a tank in the garden, and also by the need to keep an eye on
levels - why didn't I ring up several weeks ago now I'm snowed in!! But the
boiler works well and keeps us warm. On the other hand electricity would be
easier to install but possibly with prohibitively expensive continuing
costs. I am tempted though by the 'green' electricity you can get, I like
the thought of being able to be at least a bit environmentally friendly.

Has anyone else gone through this kind of decision making recently and can
help me weigh up the pros and cons?

thanks

jen


On my house, that has only electricity, and am going to use a ground
source heat pump, underfloor heating (its ideal partner), and good
insulation.

These heat pumps claim for every one unit of lecie you put in, you get
four of heat out. You can also run them in reverse for cooling.

I will have 2 woodburners, so will also take heat from back boilers
when its cold.

You can hide oil/gas tanks in big holes if you like .........


Rick

"Dave Liquorice" wrote in message



I am tempted though by the 'green' electricity you can get, I like
the thought of being able to be at least a bit environmentally
friendly.

"Green" stuff costs more than "normal"...

But normal costs the Earth more ... and therefore our grandchildren and
theirs ...

Mary

--
Cheers
Dave. pam is missing e-mail

I'm not aware of the green electricity thing. Normal electricity supply gives off massive hydrocarbon emissions far in excess of oil or gas heating, and costs far more. It's a no brainer, go for oil. If you want to be green buy reprocessed vegetable oil.

"Rick" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 10:22:10 -0000, "J Ashton"
wrote:

Good morning
I'm thinking of buying a house that needs a lot doing to it. One of
those
things is central heating. It's in an area without gas so I suppose the
choices are oil or electricity. Is there a website perhaps which will
help
me decide? I believe that normally oil is cheaper, but I have oil in my
present house and am irritated by the variations in price every time I
ring
up as well as the need to ring a range of suppliers, I'm irritated also
by
the eyesore of a tank in the garden, and also by the need to keep an eye
on
levels - why didn't I ring up several weeks ago now I'm snowed in!! But
the
boiler works well and keeps us warm. On the other hand electricity would
be
easier to install but possibly with prohibitively expensive continuing
costs. I am tempted though by the 'green' electricity you can get, I
like
the thought of being able to be at least a bit environmentally friendly.

Has anyone else gone through this kind of decision making recently and
can
help me weigh up the pros and cons?

thanks

jen


On my house, that has only electricity, and am going to use a ground
source heat pump, underfloor heating (its ideal partner), and good
insulation.

These heat pumps claim for every one unit of lecie you put in, you get
four of heat out. You can also run them in reverse for cooling.

I will have 2 woodburners, so will also take heat from back boilers
when its cold.

You can hide oil/gas tanks in big holes if you like .........

Rick

Heat pumps and underfloor heating have a very high capital cost. Best use
that money on insulation and air-tightness and have virtually no bills at
all. A cheap LPG condensing boiler is all you need for DHW and partial CH.
Cheap to install and very low bills and you don't use much.

Or, if the building is to superinsulation standards you can install electric
partial heating DHW. No annual service bills to worry about which will
offset the high electricity purchase price of which you will use very of of.

BTW, a heat pumps running costs is the same as a gas condensing boiler, yet
a boiler is very cheap to buy and install. From an environmental view
electricity is 30-40% efficient while gas is ober 90% efficient.




_________________________________________
Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server
More than 120,000 groups
Unlimited download
http://www.usenetzone.com to open account

"J Ashton" wrote
| It's in an area without gas so I suppose the
| choices are oil or electricity.

Solid fuel might be an option. Especially if you have space for a boiler
house you can get self-feeding solid fuel boilers rather than having fuel in
the house.

Calor is another possibility. Expensive to run, but the tank can be buried
in a permanent installation. (At least, they can in Italy, and we're in
Europe now...)

Obviously the more you can insulate the less heat you will need.

Owain

"Paul Barker" wrote in message
...


I'm not aware of the green electricity thing.

Don't you read your electricity bill?

Doesn't it offer green alternatives and explanations?

Normal electricity supply
gives off massive hydrocarbon emissions far in excess of oil or gas
heating, and costs far more.

Quite, that's why green alternatives are offered.

It's a no brainer, go for oil. If you want
to be green buy reprocessed vegetable oil.

Oils from any source still produce CO2. Greenhouse gas.

Mary

Mary Fisher wrote:

Oils from any source still produce CO2. Greenhouse gas.


I'm surprised by that statement Mary. Surely the point is whether a fuel
is carbon-neutral or not. If you burn veg oil in your boiler, your net
CO2 contribution is almost zero (processing/transport costs mean it
isn't *zero*). This is a far 'greener' way of heating your house than
using electricity derived from any source other than nuclear.

By the way - global warming - despite what the media would have you
believe, scientific opinion is still very much divided over whether
*any* of the observed global warming is anthropogenic in nature.


--
Grunff

"Owain" wrote in message
...
"J Ashton" wrote
| It's in an area without gas so I suppose the
| choices are oil or electricity.

Solid fuel might be an option. Especially if you have space for a boiler
house you can get self-feeding solid fuel boilers rather than having fuel
in
the house.

Calor is another possibility. Expensive to run, but the tank can be buried
in a permanent installation. (At least, they can in Italy, and we're in
Europe now...)

Obviously the more you can insulate the less heat you will need.


Oil tanks can also be buried subject to suitable design

Grunff wrote:

By the way - global warming - despite what the media would have you
believe, scientific opinion is still very much divided over whether
*any* of the observed global warming is anthropogenic in nature.

Judging from the article in New Scientist a few weeks ago, the vast
majority of scientific opinion is that global warming is a fact with the
main discussions on how soon and how bad it is going to get.

Many of the sceptics can be discounted on the basis of their vested
interests, or the fact that their scientific knowledge has limited
relevance to the study of climate change.

At the end of the day all information will be filtered through the
media, all you can do is read as widely as possible and make up your own
mind.

Chris


--
Cut along the dotted line to reply

On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 14:09:13 -0000, "Doctor Evil"
wrote:


"Rick" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 10:22:10 -0000, "J Ashton"
wrote:

Good morning
I'm thinking of buying a house that needs a lot doing to it. One of
those
things is central heating. It's in an area without gas so I suppose the
choices are oil or electricity. Is there a website perhaps which will
help
me decide? I believe that normally oil is cheaper, but I have oil in my
present house and am irritated by the variations in price every time I
ring
up as well as the need to ring a range of suppliers, I'm irritated also
by
the eyesore of a tank in the garden, and also by the need to keep an eye
on
levels - why didn't I ring up several weeks ago now I'm snowed in!! But
the
boiler works well and keeps us warm. On the other hand electricity would
be
easier to install but possibly with prohibitively expensive continuing
costs. I am tempted though by the 'green' electricity you can get, I
like
the thought of being able to be at least a bit environmentally friendly.

Has anyone else gone through this kind of decision making recently and
can
help me weigh up the pros and cons?

thanks

jen


On my house, that has only electricity, and am going to use a ground
source heat pump, underfloor heating (its ideal partner), and good
insulation.

These heat pumps claim for every one unit of lecie you put in, you get
four of heat out. You can also run them in reverse for cooling.

I will have 2 woodburners, so will also take heat from back boilers
when its cold.

You can hide oil/gas tanks in big holes if you like .........

Rick

Heat pumps and underfloor heating have a very high capital cost. Best use
that money on insulation and air-tightness and have virtually no bills at
all. A cheap LPG condensing boiler is all you need for DHW and partial CH.
Cheap to install and very low bills and you don't use much.

Or, if the building is to superinsulation standards you can install electric
partial heating DHW. No annual service bills to worry about which will
offset the high electricity purchase price of which you will use very of of.

BTW, a heat pumps running costs is the same as a gas condensing boiler, yet
a boiler is very cheap to buy and install. From an environmental view
electricity is 30-40% efficient while gas is ober 90% efficient.



I have got my U value down to .2 on floors, walls and celings, windows
and doors are 1.6 (ish). This is costing a small fortune in
insulation, and in places is only possible due to the type of building
I have. Quite how you get it better, and still have an affordable
build is beoynd me ...... My insulation averages 200mm thick, but in
places reaches 350mm, the worst places its 100mm. (I have cavites that
vary in width due to a bent outside wall). The insulation is costing
similar ammounts to my blocks and roofing materials. I have no labor
costs to add into this pricing - DIY build.

Rick



_________________________________________
Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server
More than 120,000 groups
Unlimited download
http://www.usenetzone.com to open account

On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 17:12:38 -0000, "Mary Fisher"
wrote:


"Paul Barker" wrote in message
...


I'm not aware of the green electricity thing.

Don't you read your electricity bill?

Doesn't it offer green alternatives and explanations?

Normal electricity supply
gives off massive hydrocarbon emissions far in excess of oil or gas
heating, and costs far more.

Quite, that's why green alternatives are offered.

It's a no brainer, go for oil. If you want
to be green buy reprocessed vegetable oil.

Oils from any source still produce CO2. Greenhouse gas.

Mary


"Green Alternatives" are not seen as green round my way. One of two he
farmers are for the windmills, but then they own the land they will be
sat on. Everybody else is against.

The French give the neighbours of Nuclear Power stations a discount in
their lecie bills, if we start doing this we will be able to build
some "green" alternatives.

Rick

Chris wrote:

Judging from the article in New Scientist

Ah, that most respected of scientific journals...


a few weeks ago, the vast
majority of scientific opinion is that global warming is a fact

So far so good.


with the
main discussions on how soon and how bad it is going to get.

Well, and whether anything we've done over the past 200 years has made
any difference whatesoever to the trend.



Many of the sceptics can be discounted on the basis of their vested
interests, or the fact that their scientific knowledge has limited
relevance to the study of climate change.

I don't work for an oil company, and I have a degree in environmental
chemistry.


At the end of the day all information will be filtered through the
media, all you can do is read as widely as possible and make up your own
mind.

Not really; original data is readily available.


--
Grunff

"Grunff" wrote in message
...
Chris wrote:

Judging from the article in New Scientist

Ah, that most respected of scientific journals...


a few weeks ago, the vast
majority of scientific opinion is that global warming is a fact

So far so good.


with the
main discussions on how soon and how bad it is going to get.

Well, and whether anything we've done over the past 200 years has made
any difference whatesoever to the trend.

snip garbage. Global warming is real and a fact and man made


_________________________________________
Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server
More than 120,000 groups
Unlimited download
http://www.usenetzone.com to open account

"Grunff" wrote in message
...
Mary Fisher wrote:

Oils from any source still produce CO2. Greenhouse gas.


I'm surprised by that statement Mary. Surely the point is whether a fuel
is carbon-neutral or not.

That's another element of the equation.

If you burn veg oil in your boiler, your net CO2 contribution is almost
zero (processing/transport costs mean it isn't *zero*). This is a far
'greener' way of heating your house than using electricity derived from
any source other than nuclear.

Wind.

By the way - global warming - despite what the media would have you
believe, scientific opinion is still very much divided over whether *any*
of the observed global warming is anthropogenic in nature.

I know. But I prefer not to gamble on it. The words "Best Scientific Advice"
have a hollow ring ...

Mary


--
Grunff

"Rick" wrote in message
...


"Green Alternatives" are not seen as green round my way. One of two he
farmers are for the windmills, but then they own the land they will be
sat on.

Everybody else is against.

Evidence?

I'm not against and I'm not a land owner.

The French give the neighbours of Nuclear Power stations a discount in
their lecie bills, if we start doing this we will be able to build
some "green" alternatives.

Agreed.

Mary

Rick

Rick wrote:

On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 10:22:10 -0000, "J Ashton"
wrote:


Good morning
I'm thinking of buying a house that needs a lot doing to it. One of those
things is central heating. It's in an area without gas so I suppose the
choices are oil or electricity. Is there a website perhaps which will help
me decide? I believe that normally oil is cheaper, but I have oil in my
present house and am irritated by the variations in price every time I ring
up as well as the need to ring a range of suppliers, I'm irritated also by
the eyesore of a tank in the garden, and also by the need to keep an eye on
levels - why didn't I ring up several weeks ago now I'm snowed in!! But the
boiler works well and keeps us warm. On the other hand electricity would be
easier to install but possibly with prohibitively expensive continuing
costs. I am tempted though by the 'green' electricity you can get, I like
the thought of being able to be at least a bit environmentally friendly.

Has anyone else gone through this kind of decision making recently and can
help me weigh up the pros and cons?

thanks

jen



On my house, that has only electricity, and am going to use a ground
source heat pump, underfloor heating (its ideal partner), and good
insulation.

These heat pumps claim for every one unit of lecie you put in, you get
four of heat out. You can also run them in reverse for cooling.

I will have 2 woodburners, so will also take heat from back boilers
when its cold.

You can hide oil/gas tanks in big holes if you like .........


Not so good for maintenance and gravity feed.
You can build follies round em too.

Best form of central heating is a lot of different ones.

Ive got a gravity feed aga, and electric pumped boiler, two open fires
and a wood stove.

One way or another we keep from hypothermia.


Rick

Mary Fisher wrote:

"Paul Barker" wrote in message
...


I'm not aware of the green electricity thing.


Don't you read your electricity bill?

Doesn't it offer green alternatives and explanations?


Normal electricity supply
gives off massive hydrocarbon emissions far in excess of oil or gas
heating, and costs far more.


Quite, that's why green alternatives are offered.


It's a no brainer, go for oil. If you want
to be green buy reprocessed vegetable oil.


Oils from any source still produce CO2. Greenhouse gas.

Ye but no but oil from plants took it from the amosphere last year,
rather than 50 million years ago.

This is reckoned to be better.


Mary

Grunff wrote:

Mary Fisher wrote:

Oils from any source still produce CO2. Greenhouse gas.



I'm surprised by that statement Mary. Surely the point is whether a fuel
is carbon-neutral or not. If you burn veg oil in your boiler, your net
CO2 contribution is almost zero (processing/transport costs mean it
isn't *zero*). This is a far 'greener' way of heating your house than
using electricity derived from any source other than nuclear.

By the way - global warming - despite what the media would have you
believe, scientific opinion is still very much divided over whether
*any* of the observed global warming is anthropogenic in nature.


I don't think scientific opinion is divided at all.

Political opionion may be as is opinion from various interest who have
axes to grind.

Independent scientists however are finding far too much accurate
correlation to be completely wrong.

Rick wrote:


I have got my U value down to .2 on floors, walls and celings, windows
and doors are 1.6 (ish). This is costing a small fortune in
insulation, and in places is only possible due to the type of building
I have. Quite how you get it better, and still have an affordable
build is beoynd me ...... My insulation averages 200mm thick, but in
places reaches 350mm, the worst places its 100mm. (I have cavites that
vary in width due to a bent outside wall). The insulation is costing
similar ammounts to my blocks and roofing materials. I have no labor
costs to add into this pricing - DIY build.

Rick


Welcome to Drivels idiocies.

Unless you also install heatr excahnges in a forced air ventilatotion
system, you are already beyind what is necessary - air changes alone
will wreck the insulation levels.

Until nucelar power gets to be the sort of penny a Kwh it ought to be,
you are stuck with buring fossil fuels of some sort.

Install a wet heating system, and change to electric boiler when they
build the power stations.

If in the sticks, wood burbning fires and stves are somewhat 'greener'
and you can add plenty of nxious dioxins to the atmosphere as well.

On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 19:49:03 GMT, Rick wrote:


I have got my U value down to .2 on floors, walls and celings, windows
and doors are 1.6 (ish). This is costing a small fortune in
insulation, and in places is only possible due to the type of building
I have. Quite how you get it better, and still have an affordable
build is beoynd me ......

If you take a look at previous postings from Dr Evil/IMM you'll find
that a fair bit of what he claims is beyond many people :-)

Cheers,

John

"John Anderton" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 19:49:03 GMT, Rick wrote:

If you take a look at previous postings from Dr Evil/IMM

Is THAT who it is!

I hadn't realised ... doh ...

Mary

Mary Fisher wrote:

If you burn veg oil in your boiler, your net CO2 contribution is almost
zero (processing/transport costs mean it isn't *zero*). This is a far
'greener' way of heating your house than using electricity derived from
any source other than nuclear.


Wind.

I did think about mentioning it, but it isn't really a viable
alternative - how much of our energy could realistically come from wind?


--
Grunff

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote
[oil tanks]
| You can build follies round em too.

But if the folly has the purpose of concealing the oil tank, does it not
then cease to be a folly?

| Best form of central heating is a lot of different ones.
| Ive got a gravity feed aga, and electric pumped boiler,
| two open fires and a wood stove.
| One way or another we keep from hypothermia.

Cats are a pretty useful back-up too.

Owain

On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 23:42:02 -0000, "Mary Fisher"
wrote:


"John Anderton" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 19:49:03 GMT, Rick wrote:

If you take a look at previous postings from Dr Evil/IMM

Is THAT who it is!

I hadn't realised ... doh ...

Oh yes. In fact there have been suggestions that he's got a couple of
other sock puppets that he uses when posting here.

For some reason his use of various disguises put me in mind of the
Unigate(?) adverts from years ago. "Watch out, watch out, there's an
IMM about"

:-)

Cheers,

John (Emphatically not Adam/IMM/Dr Evil/etc.)

"John Anderton" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 19:49:03 GMT, Rick wrote:


I have got my U value down to .2 on floors, walls and celings, windows
and doors are 1.6 (ish). This is costing a small fortune in
insulation, and in places is only possible due to the type of building
I have. Quite how you get it better, and still have an affordable
build is beoynd me ......

If you take a look at previous postings from Dr Evil/IMM you'll find
that a fair bit of what he claims is beyond many people :-)

Such as?


_________________________________________
Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server
More than 120,000 groups
Unlimited download
http://www.usenetzone.com to open account

"Grunff" wrote in message
...
Mary Fisher wrote:

If you burn veg oil in your boiler, your net CO2 contribution is almost
zero (processing/transport costs mean it isn't *zero*). This is a far
'greener' way of heating your house than using electricity derived from
any source other than nuclear.

Wind.

I did think about mentioning it, but it isn't really a viable
alternative - how much of our energy could realistically come from wind?

The government aims for 20-25% and around 30% of homes (not 30% of power) to
have a Stirling engine mCHP boiler giving distributed power generation. The
first 500 are being installed now.




_________________________________________
Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server
More than 120,000 groups
Unlimited download
http://www.usenetzone.com to open account

On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 00:17:05 -0000, "Doctor Evil"
wrote:


"John Anderton" wrote in message

If you take a look at previous postings from Dr Evil/IMM you'll find
that a fair bit of what he claims is beyond many people :-)

Such as?


Your comments about electronic de-scalers in the "Hard water" thread
about five days ago spring immediately to mind.

Cheers,

John

On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 00:07:23 UTC, Grunff wrote:

Mary Fisher wrote:

If you burn veg oil in your boiler, your net CO2 contribution is almost
zero (processing/transport costs mean it isn't *zero*). This is a far
'greener' way of heating your house than using electricity derived from
any source other than nuclear.


Wind.

I did think about mentioning it, but it isn't really a viable
alternative - how much of our energy could realistically come from wind?

Depends how many birds you're prepared to chop up! They're just
installing a load of them (wind turbines, not birds) out to sea right
here...

Come to that, what about hydro?

--
Bob Eager
begin a new life...dump Windows!

"Grunff" wrote in message
...
Doctor Evil wrote:

I did think about mentioning it, but it isn't really a viable
alternative - how much of our energy could realistically come from wind?


The government aims for 20-25% and around 30% of homes (not 30% of
power) to
have a Stirling engine mCHP boiler giving distributed power generation.
The
first 500 are being installed now.


First off, I don't give a crap what the government aims for - it is
meaningless.

Well as they run the place you better take not of what they say.

Second - please tell me what your statement has to do with wind.

Look at the 20-25% bit. That is a clue.

Third - what fuel will these mCHP boilers run off? Nuclear?

Natural gas, which is 80% efficient when creating power locally, which
electricity is about 35% efficient from the station.




_________________________________________
Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server
More than 120,000 groups
Unlimited download
http://www.usenetzone.com to open account

Doctor Evil wrote:

I did think about mentioning it, but it isn't really a viable
alternative - how much of our energy could realistically come from wind?


The government aims for 20-25% and around 30% of homes (not 30% of power) to
have a Stirling engine mCHP boiler giving distributed power generation. The
first 500 are being installed now.


First off, I don't give a crap what the government aims for - it is
meaningless.

Second - please tell me what your statement has to do with wind.

Third - what fuel will these mCHP boilers run off? Nuclear?


--
Grunff

"Bob Eager" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 00:07:23 UTC, Grunff wrote:

Mary Fisher wrote:

If you burn veg oil in your boiler, your net CO2 contribution is
almost
zero (processing/transport costs mean it isn't *zero*). This is a far
'greener' way of heating your house than using electricity derived
from
any source other than nuclear.


Wind.

I did think about mentioning it, but it isn't really a viable
alternative - how much of our energy could realistically come from wind?

Depends how many birds you're prepared to chop up! They're just
installing a load of them (wind turbines, not birds) out to sea right
here...

Come to that, what about hydro?

I always thought it best to use wind to pump water to a mountain top lake
and use the water for hydro power on-demand. Wind may produce a lot during
the night when demand is low.


_________________________________________
Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server
More than 120,000 groups
Unlimited download
http://www.usenetzone.com to open account

On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 00:22:20 -0000, "Doctor Evil"
wrote:


"Grunff" wrote in message
...
Mary Fisher wrote:

If you burn veg oil in your boiler, your net CO2 contribution is almost
zero (processing/transport costs mean it isn't *zero*). This is a far
'greener' way of heating your house than using electricity derived from
any source other than nuclear.

Wind.

I did think about mentioning it, but it isn't really a viable
alternative - how much of our energy could realistically come from wind?

The government aims for 20-25% and around 30% of homes (not 30% of power) to
have a Stirling engine mCHP boiler giving distributed power generation. The
first 500 are being installed now.


The government aims for all sorts of things, but doesn't even seem to
be able to manage to do so correctly in the toilet.




--

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

Bob Eager wrote:

Depends how many birds you're prepared to chop up! They're just
installing a load of them (wind turbines, not birds) out to sea right
here...

My objection to wind is a purely logical one - how much of the country
would need to be covered by turbines to provide say 80% of our energy?


Come to that, what about hydro?

It's a better option than wind, certainly, but still not really a solution.

The problem is this. The only way to reduce CO2 emissions (whether we
need to is another matter) in any real sense over the next 50 years is
by switching to nuclear. But the same people who get worked up about
climate change (mostly) also get worked up about nuclear power.


--
Grunff

"John Anderton" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 00:17:05 -0000, "Doctor Evil"
wrote:


"John Anderton" wrote in message

If you take a look at previous postings from Dr Evil/IMM you'll find
that a fair bit of what he claims is beyond many people :-)

Such as?

Your comments about electronic de-scalers in the "Hard water" thread
about five days ago spring immediately to mind.

I have one and it works. Look at this. A major maker has them on their
kit.
http://www.heatweb.com/products/tanks/iso.jpg

Botom left corner on the pipe. It is plainly clear you haven't a clue. But
this is the Internet where idiots and fools can be heard as easily as the
experts.



_________________________________________
Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server
More than 120,000 groups
Unlimited download
http://www.usenetzone.com to open account

Doctor Evil wrote:

Natural gas, which is 80% efficient when creating power locally, which
electricity is about 35% efficient from the station.


You don't get it, do you? It still increases the total amount of CO2 in
the atmosphere.


--
Grunff

Grunff wrote:

Mary Fisher wrote:

If you burn veg oil in your boiler, your net CO2 contribution is
almost zero (processing/transport costs mean it isn't *zero*). This
is a far 'greener' way of heating your house than using electricity
derived from any source other than nuclear.



Wind.


I did think about mentioning it, but it isn't really a viable
alternative - how much of our energy could realistically come from wind?


If you stick a pipe up your arse and live on lentils and sprouts, quite
a bit.

Doctor Evil wrote:

"Grunff" wrote in message
...

Mary Fisher wrote:


If you burn veg oil in your boiler, your net CO2 contribution is almost
zero (processing/transport costs mean it isn't *zero*). This is a far
'greener' way of heating your house than using electricity derived from
any source other than nuclear.

Wind.

I did think about mentioning it, but it isn't really a viable
alternative - how much of our energy could realistically come from wind?


The government aims for 20-25%

The government aims alwaqys for lofty targets and ends up grovelling in
the mud.

and around 30% of homes (not 30% of power) to
have a Stirling engine mCHP boiler giving distributed power generation.

Utter ********.

The
first 500 are being installed now.

In your dreams.




_________________________________________
Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server
More than 120,000 groups
Unlimited download
http://www.usenetzone.com to open account