SteamyTea

Only income when the asset (shares) is converted to cash. And the only if it is not reinvested.

I hope they have convinced their investors that it is best. I see this sort of thing as just a scheme for taking money of the wealthy and giving it to the not quite so wealthy.

https://forum.buildhub.org.uk/topic/20085-ovo-heat-trial-preliminary-design/

I think there is another thread about the Ovo trial.

Have you already got a heating system in that uses microbore? Do you know how to do thermal calculations for a house?

While humans, that are currently alive, are part of the Earth's ecosystem, we have to treat ourselves differently. We are probably the only animal that is aware of our mortality, and what can cause and can be done to change it. One of the questions that needs to be answered is how responsible we need to be to future generations of all species , that may, or many not exist, while at the same time blaming, or not blaming, past generations of humans that got us to where were are. The trouble with this sort of philosophical question is that it easily gets into a loop, and all examples are generally extremes, the reality or idealist argument. These get us nowhere. I can well understand people wanting to build a better world for current generations, and being the optimist I am, I think we are on the correct track, I am not so sure if we need to do more for unborn generations. There may be, in the future, a global paradigm shift in attitudes to population levels, or some extra-terrestrial global threat without sufficient warning. It would be a shame to dismantle much of the good in our current economy just when it was needed, and could make a very low cost improvement. Think medical innovations and relocating climate refugees to better designed homes. This is not my area of environmental science, I just had to spend a long year with people that were concerned about it. One thing that did struck me early on, was that they tend to be idealists and alarmists, while often missing the big picture. One was involved in returning a lake into a 'better shape'. it was hard to pinpoint exactly what that meant, but seemed to be returning it to its pre-1930s state. I suggest that a few barrels of arsenic and some lead would help that along, but he wanted Daphnia pulex and brown trout, the thugs of the river systems. Humans have the ability to adapt very fast to a changing environment, just look at how quickly some places recover after a natural disaster (Japan) and how fast we can also recover after a man-made disaster (Europe after WW2). I don't how much we should be concerned for, what is in reality, small scale ecological degradation. I can remember kayaking in the Thames in the mid 1970's when dead fish were floating on the surface. We cleaned that up pretty quickly, while at the same time as cleaning up our combustion technologies that were causing acid rain in the Scanwegian countries (this is contentious even today as some of the lakes may have been locally polluted). So I think we do have enough knowledge to know what we can, and can't get away with. Acting on it is a different matter. I am not sure if this is desirable. We tend to be using legacy technologies, think heating systems and transport. We would be better off dumping them (well recycling some of the cheaper to reclaim elements) than repairing them. It is the same with many consumer parts. If we redesigned them to be made repairable, we would probably end up with inferior products, that are more costly to make, with the need for a stock of spare parts distributed and stored around the world, using more energy. My Kindle probably has a lower mass than the motherboard in my old DX4-100, the fuel injection on my car is certainly better, and more reliable, than the carburettor on my old MGB (the last carburettor car I had). I binned my old toaster when it failed, just use the grill in the oven, so I in effect, had two toasters. Mass production, in the cheapest places that can make things, is the way to go (division of labour and competitive advantage). We have international standards for employment and environmental issues as part of global trading (not always adhered to, and less likely to be adhered to post BREXIT), but that is down to us to enforce them by not buying the goods, we can easily check where things are made, and how they are made, these days (though probably not on a DX4-100 PC that burned 300W on idle). Energy is an interesting one from an economics point of view. Should all energy be treated equally? If it should be treated equally, would that be on a global currency, say the US Dollar, or on a purchase price parity basis? I have always liked the idea of using energy as a global currency, with the MJ as the base unit. There would be lots of problems with this as some energy is better than others, this would mean we need an entropy adjuster, but that is not insurmountable and could be easily automated. Where the real problems come in is to do with food energy. Should this be priced (PPP or no) at the same as thermal energy, or electrical energy (or even elastic energy)? How would we deal with zero energy food product? Water is vital, but has no calorific value, would it be free, just the processing, transport and storage cost, or a quid a bottle 'because it comes from volcanic rock'. I think the trouble is if we move too fast down the renewables route, we would need to rely on governments subsiding technology, governments have never been good at picking 'winners'. Our government sold off the worlds most profitable telecommunications network though a public share option, then crippled it with restrictive practices. Governments really should be left to sort out the market failures and raise taxes to pay for them. Park benches are not that expensive.

He fitted one, but found he did not need to use it much, if at all. Was more as an insurance I think. I don't know why people find DHW co complicated. You either store it or not, if not, then you heat when needed.

This really comes down to if you think the ecosystems, other than the 'us' are more important that the current generation. I am not willing to support, what would amount to genocide of the current generations, to save current, non anthropogenic, ecosystems. Though there is a lot more we can do to make life better all round, those are the tings that need doing first. So renewable energy is top of my list, then transport, then more productive farming and food distribution, then medical improvements, and way down the list is manufacturing. Those are against a backdrop of education, which is the starting point of any change. Trouble is, we seem to have things backwards.

Jeremy soon found out that KISS works best.

No so different from PV then. PV has the advantage that it can deliver some power at lower light levels as it does not rely on temperature difference as the main switching mechanism. And it don't need servicing, pipes, mechanical valves, antifreeze, expansion vessels, over pressure and temperature safety systems. Wires are easy to fit. And when the pool us hot (which you may be able to do with just resistance heating to save on installation costs), you can divert it to charge an EV. But get those thermal models fine and checked first, you may find that better pool insulation changed a price point somewhere else. And don't forget the evaporation losses.

That works out at 250/m2. https://edavies.me.uk/2012/01/pv-et-flat/

It is a good think. You can extract about 4 times as much energy out of water than dry ground. GSHP are really water source heat pumps with the water heated by solar energy.

Yes, unless they vanished in the last month. https://www.gshp.org.uk/RHI_Domestic.html

Right, you have 3 things to do. Heat a house Heat DHW Heat a swimming pool. These are quite different things, done at different times and to different temperatures. Treat them separately. As for ST and PV, PV will probably be cheaper, more reliable and better looking. Don't discount a GSHP, they are less weather dependant, but don't share the loops, this will be a problem. They may cost more and have the HP part inside, but it is not as if you are scratching around to save a grand, and you have plenty of room to hide the noisy part away. You also have to think about heat recovery and air conditioning. You could probably run all your DHW of the extraction from the pool room.

And a fair few neighbours as well. And no chopping down and post coppicing processing. Always worth comparing the energy yields, and associated power outputs for different energy sources.

Pretty ropey land then. Farmers would not build a solar farm on productive land, it is just not financially viable. We are heading into 2nd agricultural revolution (or a third one depending on if you count the improvements in crops as separate from mechanisation). We easily grow 50% more crops per unit land area than we did 50 years ago, this will probably double in the net 25 to 30 years with better practices and monitoring, as well as GM crops. Source: BRIEFING PAPER Number 3339, 25 June 2019 Agriculture: historical statistics

His original design was not very good, one of those combined DHW cylinders with the F&E on top, then sprayed with a bit more foam. I just think they are very expensive for what they are. Useful in a tiny house, or flat, but only if heated with electricity only. As soon as renewables or gas come into the equation, it is a very expensive option.

Cover it in PV, it has an energy yield about 40 times of biomass.

Welcome There are a of of opinions, and some useful facts. And some Walk on Glazing for sale.

Is it really good agricultural land, most of Cornwall is grade 3b and below. That is by value, not calorific content or staples. I wish they would open up more areas for commercial usage, worth taking a look at the economic activity of an area. Mine is not all pasties and surfboards, most is services, with tourism accounting for about 12%. Any new business would have to comply with modern environmental legislation. I feel there is a bit of NIMBYism going on here. Half the time people are complain they cannot get planning consent, then want to stop anything else. Look at an aerial map of the UK and tell me what the predominant colour is, we have urbanised less that 10% of the land area, with housing being around 2%. The UK produces more area of cars every year that all building works.

I think you get that option when you connect your computer to the network, bit like when logging into the O2 'free' wireless at cafes.

Dead easy with 20 quid of hardware. Be interesting to see if yours is still logging, hot to be a couple of years since I was last over.

You could always make an offer to buy the site.

More like calling one a pig, and the other a snake. Different species.