Renewable energy

[T6 CFO]

Although not for power but for heating, we're looking at doing similar by installing a ground source heat pump. Local council told us to sod off re solar panels, which isnt at all helpful.

Does feel like all of these solutions need some serious consideration moving forward.

This thread has prompted us to bring forward at least the planning for a switch to solar thermal.
We live in a conservation area which is all about the front and the street. Rear of the house is perfect for solar as it’s South facing and has an existing large sun room which has no conservation merit with a glass roof which would I think be perfect to adapt.
Some reading tells me I would need to convert to a standard boiler setup. Think I’ll get an expert in to see how to do it and then approach the planners.
Like you I’ll be unhappy if they block it.



Mike

 

[Wildcamper]

There is only one solution based on the science and what we are capable of doing now - Consume Less.
All we are doing is looking for ways to carry on our present level of consumption, of things, of energy and resources and the problem each way we go we encounter or will encounter significant environmental problems.
Maybe Nuclear Fusion?

The Law of Unintended Consequences is alive and well.

When I look at a problem I like to fix that issue but then look deeper as to the underlying cause. Just mending is often just papering over the crack, it will reopen. As I see it the environmental problems we face all stem from a single cause - a singularity. Be it shortages of, water, housing, energy, wild spaces, clean air ....
Why are there a shortages, it's overconsumption and consumption is people using stuff. The planet is very well balanced if we treat it well. If I want some wood I might go into the woods and cut a branch. That branch will regrow, 10, 25 or more year required. But if 1000 people all chop a branch off then the tree is dead. So stepping backwards through the questions starting from any of the above - take water. Why are we short of drinking water = overconsumption. Overconsuming because too many people. Reduce people = reduced consumption = water supply restored. Reducing the population (very unpopular) will remove the housing shortage, reduce pollution of all sorts, clean water for all (or many more), will give wild spaces more chance to recover, help wildlife .. you get the idea. Will it be easy - heck no! But also think virus. Viruses love warm crowded spaces. Nature has warned mankind since the Black Death and before that it holds the upper hand - recently SARS, MERS, Bird Flu, Covid etc. The more humanity disturbs the wild places the more likely a virus, far more deadly than Covid, will be released. The end of humanity will most likely come from a virus not a planetary impact. Somehow the people of this planet need to look in the mirror and ask how to reduce population by about 1/3. Beyond my pay grade!

 

[Velma's Dad]

This thread has prompted us to bring forward at least the planning for a switch to solar thermal.
We live in a conservation area which is all about the front and the street. Rear of the house is perfect for solar as it’s South facing and has an existing large sun room which has no conservation merit with a glass roof which would I think be perfect to adapt.
Some reading tells me I would need to convert to a standard boiler setup. Think I’ll get an expert in to see how to do it and then approach the planners.
Like you I’ll be unhappy if they block it.



Mike

Are you dead set on solar thermal? We had it at our last house but now I'd be more inclined to look at PV for UK domestic use-case.

 

[66tim99]

Yes its 2(3) fold. The rear of our property faces a Grade2 listed property and own property is marked as being an English Heritage asset and we're in a conservation area, so we've no chance. Apparently we can place them in the garden but we're not quite over moon about that one just yet.

You might have luck with the tiles rather than panels

 

[Sunstoner]

You might have luck with the tiles rather than panels

It shows you where Im at......they do solar tiles now? (please dont say they've been around for yonks! lol)

Are they comparable ?

 

[Sunstoner]

This thread has prompted us to bring forward at least the planning for a switch to solar thermal.
We live in a conservation area which is all about the front and the street. Rear of the house is perfect for solar as it’s South facing and has an existing large sun room which has no conservation merit with a glass roof which would I think be perfect to adapt.
Some reading tells me I would need to convert to a standard boiler setup. Think I’ll get an expert in to see how to do it and then approach the planners.
Like you I’ll be unhappy if they block it.



Mike

Its well worth it. My friend loves to tell me and share screenshots about how much 'leccy' he's not paying for when running his appliances. Its pretty bonkers tbh.

Getting knocked back was an arse. Anything to get the bills down and be a tiny bit more self-sufficient. We applied when we moved in 10 years back got the same response but thought times had changed. Apparently not.

 

[T6 CFO]

Are you dead set on solar thermal? We had it at our last house but now I'd be more inclined to look at PV for UK domestic use-case.

No we are open minded and was partly the reason for my post as it’s not something I know a great deal about. Thanks

This gives me a starter for ten on the subject.

Solar Panels vs Solar Thermal Technology (2021) | GreenMatch

Solar Thermal or Solar Panels? Firstly, it’s important to understand that solar thermal and solar PV are two very diffe...

www.greenmatch.co.uk

Bought this Victorian house just over 2 years ago and completely renovated it structurally and cosmetically except for the out of character sun room on the back.
House is a forever family house with the effort we’ve put into it so doing the right thing long term is key.
Only changes so far have been up rating power to allow for the induction cooker and some underfloor heating. Thinking has been to move away from reliance on gas and go all electric when boiler technology allows it so PV could be the answer.




Mike

 

[66tim99]

It shows you where Im at......they do solar tiles now? (please dont say they've been around for yonks! lol)

Are they comparable ?

They have been around for around 10 years. They are more expensive and less efficient than panels, but look much betterhttps://www.solarguide.co.uk/solar-roof-tile-manufacturers#/

 

[T6 CFO]

Its well worth it. My friend loves to tell me and share screenshots about how much 'leccy' he's not paying for when running his appliances. Its pretty bonkers tbh.

Getting knocked back was an arse. Anything to get the bills down and be a tiny bit more self-sufficient. We applied when we moved in 10 years back got the same response but thought times had changed. Apparently not.

That’s a pity. Fortunately our conservation officer has been sensible so far and rightly so as all we’ve done is restore the house to its former glory from a sorry state. I’ll get my ducks lined up before approaching them on this.


Mike

 

[Sunstoner]

That’s a pity. Fortunately our conservation officer has been sensible so far and rightly so as all we’ve done is restore the house to its former glory from a sorry state. I’ll get my ducks lined up before approaching them on this.


Mike

Hopefully your planning officer will be more forward thinking and give you the green light.

I'll give it another go in a few years. Seems daft not getting the ok in the current climate.

 

[WelshGas]

Once upon a time, in the not too distant past it was thought that Diesel would be the climate saviour and we all know what happened there.

 

[Wildcamper]

From what I read there is very little wrong with a well maintained Euro 6 diesel with Adblue and particulate filter. What has given diesels a bad name is the old smoky engines that are neglected.

 

[Velma's Dad]

Helpful site assessing media bias, and Fake Noos.
BBC (High factual reporting, slightly left of centre) more objective than the Telegraph ('mixed' factual reporting, Right wing)and the Guardian ('mixed' factual, Centre-left). All more objective than the Daily Mail (Low factual reporting, further right than the Telegraph, bordering on Extreme)
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/daily-telegraph/

Anyways... slightly(!) off topic but as we were talking about the media and The Telegraph specifically. Some searingly insightful journalistic analysis from its chief political correspondent in today's edition:


(I can only hope - even though I couldn't detect - that's meant sarcastically. The alternative is too stupid to contemplate).

 

[soulstyledevon]

When I look at a problem I like to fix that issue but then look deeper as to the underlying cause. Just mending is often just papering over the crack, it will reopen. As I see it the environmental problems we face all stem from a single cause - a singularity. Be it shortages of, water, housing, energy, wild spaces, clean air ....
Why are there a shortages, it's overconsumption and consumption is people using stuff. The planet is very well balanced if we treat it well. If I want some wood I might go into the woods and cut a branch. That branch will regrow, 10, 25 or more year required. But if 1000 people all chop a branch off then the tree is dead. So stepping backwards through the questions starting from any of the above - take water. Why are we short of drinking water = overconsumption. Overconsuming because too many people. Reduce people = reduced consumption = water supply restored. Reducing the population (very unpopular) will remove the housing shortage, reduce pollution of all sorts, clean water for all (or many more), will give wild spaces more chance to recover, help wildlife .. you get the idea. Will it be easy - heck no! But also think virus. Viruses love warm crowded spaces. Nature has warned mankind since the Black Death and before that it holds the upper hand - recently SARS, MERS, Bird Flu, Covid etc. The more humanity disturbs the wild places the more likely a virus, far more deadly than Covid, will be released. The end of humanity will most likely come from a virus not a planetary impact. Somehow the people of this planet need to look in the mirror and ask how to reduce population by about 1/3. Beyond my pay grade!

Population growth rate is declining.
Experts predict a peak of about 10billion people and then quite a rapid drop off from there.

That’s why it’s key now, to consume less...

 

[Wildcamper]

Population growth rate is declining.
Experts predict a peak of about 10billion people and then quite a rapid drop off from there.

That’s why it’s key now, to consume less...

I treat population modelling with a large degree of distrust. As with all mathematical models "garbage in garbage out". The population in Africa is likely to quadruple between now and 2100. Look at how the population has grown since 2000. Also S America. All these new people will want to indulge in consumerism.

Agree with consume less.

 

[Velma's Dad]

Population growth rate is declining.
Experts predict a peak of about 10billion people and then quite a rapid drop off from there.

That’s why it’s key now, to consume less...

Yes of course it would be great if we all consumed less wouldn't it. It's just incredibly difficult to see how that will happen beyond the general trend line of decreasing material consumption per unit of economic activity due in large part due to the shift from 'stuff' to services in most economies which can and should be encouraged by governments.

What might the mechanisms be - politically achievable ones I mean - that would persuade people to consume less physical stuff? Tax based on materials weight is fine in principle but incredibly difficult to implement as it tends to be very regressive/inequitable. Not realistic IMO, any more than it's realistic to accelerate the attainment of peak population, other than by some win-win development strategies such as education in the poorest countries. At national levels, a faster levelling off of population will cause havoc as aging cohorts suck the life out of smaller younger segments. Even if you could achieve it by, say, incentivising childlessness.

So, given that the biggest and most urgent issue remains human-induced global climate change (local environmental harms can be mitigated locally, even though patchily), we should do the thing that is feasible, which is to decarbonise the core of the economy (electricity gen, transportation and home heating) as quickly as reasonably achievable, which we pretty much know how to do now. Rather than keep going on about how hard that is.

 

[GrumpyGranddad]

I treat population modelling with a large degree of distrust. As with all mathematical models "garbage in garbage out". The population in Africa is likely to quadruple between now and 2100. Look at how the population has grown since 2000. Also S America. All these new people will want to indulge in consumerism.

Agree with consume less.

Agree.

 

[66tim99]

Yes of course it would be great if we all consumed less wouldn't it. It's just incredibly difficult to see how that will happen beyond the general trend line of decreasing material consumption per unit of economic activity due in large part due to the shift from 'stuff' to services in most economies which can and should be encouraged by governments.

What might the mechanisms be - politically achievable ones I mean - that would persuade people to consume less physical stuff? Tax based on materials weight is fine in principle but incredibly difficult to implement as it tends to be very regressive/inequitable. Not realistic IMO, any more than it's realistic to accelerate the attainment of peak population, other than by some win-win development strategies such as education in the poorest countries. At national levels, a faster levelling off of population will cause havoc as aging cohorts suck the life out of smaller younger segments. Even if you could achieve it by, say, incentivising childlessness.

So, given that the biggest and most urgent issue remains human-induced global climate change (local environmental harms can be mitigated locally, even though patchily), we should do the thing that is feasible, which is to decarbonise the core of the economy (electricity gen, transportation and home heating) as quickly as reasonably achievable, which we pretty much know how to do now. Rather than keep going on about how hard that is.

And tax carbon equitably, the obvious being aviation fuel

 

[AndyP12345]

And tax carbon equitably, the obvious being aviation fuel

Why is the obvious one Aviation fuel?
if we tax consumption and we tax equitably then a data tax would be a good way ahead. Carbon emissions from Internet usage accounts for roughly the same as aviation so we could tax data and device consumption as well as fossil fuel use. A tax equivalent to that levied of fuel levied on data so each mobile and broadband connection would be taxed on usage. All the info is available at the network providers all we would need is a billing system

 

[GrumpyGranddad]

Why is the obvious one Aviation fuel?
if we tax consumption and we tax equitably then a data tax would be a good way ahead. Carbon emissions from Internet usage accounts for roughly the same as aviation so we could tax data and device consumption as well as fossil fuel use. A tax equivalent to that levied of fuel levied on data so each mobile and broadband connection would be taxed on usage. All the info is available at the network providers all we would need is a billing system

I suspect that will happen in the future. Internet has a considerable carbon footprint.