SteamyTea

No. Power is the Energy flow rate i.e. 1 W per second. A watt is a joule per second, so if you divide that by time, the seconds cancel out and you are left with just the joule, which is the the SI derived unit for energy. There are: 3,600,000 J in a kWh k for 1000 x 1 W [for j/s] x h for hour [for 3,600 seconds].

Depends on what is limiting the potential overspill to the grid. Generally speaking your inverter limits the amount of power that comes out our the battery storage. Think of your inverter as a tap, and your batteries as the water cylinder. Small tap, little flow (kW) large tap, bigger flow. The longer either tap is on, the less water is stored, eventually it runs dry, until it is topped up.

I have found very little correlation between weather and internal temperature. There is a general trend of the house getting cooler as the external temperature drops, but wind speed and direction don't affect it much, same with solar gain. My place is a terrace so less exposed area, but as it is small, it should react faster.

Right, it is a 12.6 kWh battery and the inverter will draw at 3 kW. So about 4.2 hours at maximum power. A normal electrical heater is about 2 kW, so you could run 1 on full power, and another on half power. Or get some 1 kW ones. Your solar panels are 6.2 kWp. kWh is energy, kW is power. Power is the rate that you use the energy.

Just go North and then a short hop across the Bering Strait, which will soon be Chinese. Actually, don't really need to cross the Pacific, they can have local geothermal and wind energy.

Like perpetual motion machines, they just need to be a bit bigger. Probably not the best route. Better to take the shortest route between major population centres, which would predominantly be Northern Hemisphere, and over more land than under the sea. The most productive 'sunshine' belt is on a latitude with Toronto, Madrid, Shenyan, Aomori, Eureka and Harrisburg. Basically Lat40°.

The astronomers will be upset, they are upset enough with the current number and orbit of satellites. I wonder how much energy would be saved by turning off all street lights in the UK.

It is always 5 PM somewhere. Not exactly a new idea, and a lot of technical challenges to overcome. But as @ProDave says, we are not short of land (even in the UK). Think I worked out once that half the area of Cornwall would produce enough GWh (but may have been enough to electrify all out transport, really can't remember). The middle bit of Cornwall is pretty miserable, so no loss, but anyway, they would not be installed in one contiguous block. I think I read about beaming power from space in Jerry Pournelle's, 1981, A Step Further Out, and it was not a new idea then. Also a bit hard to replace the inverter when it goes wrong.

Won't it turn all the 5G conspiracists into robots, and give the rest of us (an unspecified) cancer (it is always cancer, never something more mundane but equally as deadly).

Would power my house, I am usually at work then.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-humber-63707463.amp That has to be a better way to load balance.

Build a large shed, then make a jig to enable corner angles to be true, then start nailing up panels. Be up in no time.

To highlight why it is a bad, and unnecessary, experiments. I have very little usage during the day, generally under 2 kWh, usually 1.3 kWh, over 16 hours. Most people could do what I do, but won't save any money for the reasons that usage will just happen at other times. I think I read somewhere that on a previous trial the saving was 0.3 kWh.

Several, but only 1 would be used

Don't think you have. That is the problem. Putting in 25A fuses to peoples houses, and a £100 replacement fee would sort the problem pretty quick. Basically what they have in some countries.

Yes it is. It saved them buying even more nuclear plants Easier for the French to buy in power for connected countries i.e. Spain, Germany, Italy, Netherlands via Belgium, Switzerland. The concept of relying on individual households to save a few pence to 'help the grid out' is what is flawed. I can't see that each house saving 0.5 kWh over a busy period is the long term solution. Make the problem smaller and then the solutions are smaller.

Yes I do, because by reducing total energy, less primary fuel is used, this reduces (at the moment) emissions. There is a bit of a myth that the grid reacts to demand. Actually the other way around, capacity is increased, or decreased, to match predicted demand. This works very well, and our system is currently set up to favour RE over FF generation. Probably because it is not new. France has been doing it for decades. It is not so different to what I was doing in my ResM either, and that was over a decade ago. Why I think that it is an experiment that has been set up to give a negative result. It is like proving that more motorist in Devon and Cornwall are speeding, by measuring at more points (except the 'customer' does not get any rewards).

I wish they would post up the actual usage, rather than points and pennies. I am starting to think that this is an experiment that is set up tot fail. If everyone on this trial saved 0.5 kWh, that is 150 MWh, sounds a lot, but it isn't Between 5:30 pm and 6:30 pm yesterday, the national usage was 39,696 MWh. If 25 million homes did this, apart from just shifting the peak by an hour, the saving would be 12,500 MWh. That is 32%. That amount could easily be save, all the time, by basic changes i.e. don't fill the kettle more than needed, reduce tumble drying, shorter shower. If change is to come about through a price mechanism, then charge £0.5/kWh, don't reward.

Have made my mind up who is coming around to sort me out.

May as well fit them while the places is a mess, better than living with regret.

Flick the main switch and tell her that the power will come back on later.

I think out Ed dug holes and filled them up with concrete. I am still struggling, one day I may return.

I would have thought with the coming recession, there will be projects to pick up at a reasonable price. If you can find something that already has a suitable foundation poured, and you can change the house design, that may be a good option.

Is there not a plate surface area to total mass, minus the plate and mechanism mass, ratio that sets the performance? The number of impulses a minute should not affect the compacting performance, just the time it takes to cover an area.

Just the internet, you never been to a Weatherspoons?