SteamyTea

A lot of batteries are being repurposed into static storage, and anyway, it is not as if vehicles batteries are being dumped into landfill, most will be stored for later recycling. I think the disposal problem is greater in other area. https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CDP-2022-0216/CDP-2022-0216.pdf

Welcome I have a saying: Beware of builders

Does not need to be used in the latest generation of batteries.

He tried that, got a stiff neck and a dislocated hip.

Most ICEs are pretty quiet these days, why people get run over in car parks. We have them, they are unenforceable. If it is a carbon based eFuel, it produces the same as any other carbon based fuel. Ammonia, when burnt, produces NOX, but not CO2. Well we have solutions, just need to start implementing them. Hydrogen as a transport fuel has basically failed, only a handful of filling points left, even James May has sold his second Toyota Mirai, and he was an evangelist for hydrogen. Basically yes, and driving up there every couple of weeks has burnt though (literally) several thousand quid, more than enough to buy a decent second hand EV. But then I did not expect, back in October 2021, that I would still have a Mother (in a care home that costs more than a Model S every year).

Should be, as long as all the other rules about cables buried in insulation are followed.

I offered.

Two things. ICE cars are noisy (think kids with fat exhausts, over accelerating and braking) They create local air pollution. Modern EVs will be legislated to stop that behaviour via GPS positioning and associated geo-fencing control. We already have developed suitable lower CO2e liquid fuels, but we won't be pumping them in like gasoline or diesel, they will probably be interchangeable canisters, especially if ammonia or liquid hydrogen is used, that recover the stored energy via a fuel cell. What we won't be doing is burning fuels in cars, that is mid 1750's technology that should have died out in the early 1900s. The original Model T was designed to run on crop derived alcohol.

I put my neighbour's cat in irons, got told off.

Education always helps.

My local vicar was telling me about visiting old Mrs. Simpson, the straight laced, old widow. When he got there he was greeted by the two Dachshunds, Max and Molly. In conversation the Vicar asked if she had any problems with them when Molly was in season. "Oh no, I just put her up stairs then" she replied. "How does that work?" Asked the Vicar. Mrs. Simpson replied "Have you ever seen a sausage dog run up stairs with a (expletive deleted)ing hard on"

Be helpful if you had some time of use data, then you can see if just changing to a more suitable ToU tariff can make you savings. A Sunamp is an expensive way to store hot water. If you must go down a technology route, how about preheating DHW with a heat pump. Get the incoming mains temperature up to 35⁰C in say a 1000 litre cylinder, then boost up to say 48⁰C with either an immersion heater in a secondary 50 litre cylinder on site, or an instantaneous inline heater. Any PV can heat either the large cylinder and/or the smaller ones. As you are supplying hot water as a service i.e. as part of the holiday experience, you don't want to run out, so you have to build in redundancy, Sunamps are not that unreliable, just tricky to fix.

I am more worried about pensioners that trade in a Vauxhall Moka diesel for a Model 3. The use of Are the usual unclear legislation terms. It was a problem 25 years ago, and will be a problem in a decades time. Much easier to ban children and make the teacher's life easier.

Some suck better than others to.

I did that yesterday without stopping. Then, when I was starting to relax as I only had 10 quick miles to do, I had a 20 mile detour, adding nearly an hour to the journey. I hope the A30 roadworks finish soon.

We should really be looking at ways to reduce water consumption, not at ways to supply it endlessly. A smaller cylinder and frequent bollokings is the cheapest option.

Good article. Yes. I am not a facebook user, but some at work are. There was an article being pushed about Robert Preston doing something wrong on a broadcast. Now I quite like old Robert, so asked my work mate to open it. It opened up in a new window and was about Jeremy Paxman saying something wrong on telly (He has near enough been on sick leave for a few years now). A bit more digging and the same text, but with different names appeared about 'famous people'. I find it hard to believe that people fall for this, but they do. I cannot see what it achieves, except to put an air of suspicion, onto all news articles. The writer G K Chesterton said "When man stops believing in God, we will believe anything" Except he never said it. https://www.chesterton.org/ceases-to-worship/ I never really understood the 'Comprehension' aspect of our English lessons at school. The 'rewrite, using your own words, the following passage' used to bring me out in a cold sweat. Why take a classic bit writing, and ruin it, when a Dickens or Orwell writes something, that is about as good as it gets, why (expletive deleted) about with it to get an 'O' Level. I don't see any articles on Facebook that Nasa Scientist or Einstein have proved that 1 = 2 but they are keeping it a secret, even though one is dead.

That is partly because it is a new industry that is using old manufacturing processes, that is the learning curve. If you take just the cells, over the last few years the capacity had doubled, as has the longevity. So even using the same numbers from a decade ago (about 100 kg CO2e per kWh), that is already down to 25 kg CO2e kWh. Now take just an ordinary car that does 40 MPG has CO2e emissions of 150g/mile. If the 1 kWh of car battery storage can last at least 100,000 miles, and there is no reason to assume they cannot, then that is 0.01 kg CO2e/mile. An insignificant amount. Generation emission need to be added to the EV emissions, say 50g/mile. The normal car is a lot worse. Hard as it seems, people like to think that EVs take more energy to produce, they do a bit, but it is rapidly falling as we build more. Burning hydrocarbons is not the long term solution. It is way too easy to think up spurious reasons to do, or not do, something, but a few minutes with a calculator can show a much better picture. This is from 4 years ago. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-51977625

It is interesting that most of the jobs people dislike doing, or want do, are not because of the skill level required. More to do with the mass that needs lifting/mixing/moving i.e. roofing, blockwork. Or Working outside in all weathers, Home automation and why it is so uselessly incompatible with existing systems and humans.

Or 3.6 MJ.

Is it any worse than manufacturing ICE vehicles once the "learning curve" is taken into account.

Will they mate in the best West Country fashion. Or is Gaydar fitted.

That is the real problem. As much as I like Octopus trying out different tariffs, I don't want to be spending time check every time the tariff gets changed to save just a few quid a year. At least complaining will get me an another £50 quid off my bill. Which is about 5 times the savings I can make.

Should be easy enough to make one. Lots here

This can be a bit confusing. Method 1. Energy Out / Energy In times 100 5kWh [out] / 1 kWh [in] x 100 = 500% Energy Out plus Energy In / Energy In (5 kWh + 1 kWh / 1 kWh) x 100 = 600% It comes down to where the energy in is actually put in i.e. inside the building or outside the building. Taking that a step further, if there are thermal losses (and there is) from the outside unit, but the thermal metering is is done within the the unit, but the electrical metering is done at the consumer unit, then the CoP can look better than the delivered performance. I have no idea if there is an agreed standard/method for measuring CoP, I am sure there is as BSI seem to cover just about everything.