SteamyTea

What I don't like about fully pressurised system is that, by the very nature or pressure, everything is under a greater strain to start off with. Then there is the need to have your installation fitted by a certified plumber, and the annual checks for your insurance, if you bother. Then there is all the 'extras' involved, PRVs and other secondary safety devices. Just seems a lot of work and kit really. I do agree that shower pumps are noisy, but I am sure that can be mitigated with a slab of concrete and some rubber mounts. If a header tank in the loft has animals swimming in it, then that is just a bad installation. Not a problem I have ever had as I have always had the correct lid and extra insulation fitted.

Is it really to the stored volume or just the volume of the pressurised 'bladder' in it, so the usable volume will depend on the store pressure to a certain extent. A pressure vessel is really only a header tank really, just one that can supply a pressure from ground level.

And people wonder why I like vented. They are cheap and easy to install, very reliable, and once heat loss is controlled, as cheap to run as anything else. All this pressurised system is really a nonsense and just shows that is is hard to improve, for reliability and ease of use, on a vented system.

" If I had more time, I would have written a shorter letter. " Blaise Pascal 1657

The point I was making is that there is separation between the two. You only have to go into a small house/flat where the kitchen is part of the living room to know what I am on about.

Except that Joe90's place is on a large plot, and his house is fairly square, Jeremy's is on a narrower, sloping one. A lot of it does depend on how you usually enter and exit a house. Why I can not understand why kitchens in small Victorian terraces are at the back. Means you have to traps though, what is usually the living room when you first enter. Great idea when you have bags of shopping and your car is parked other end of street. Then, if you want enjoy your back garden, you can sit in your very narrow kitchen, the one with the bathroom and bog at the end.

I think it is more basic than that and all do do with compartmentalising.

There is a limit to the amount of Uranium that is available. Called 'Nuclear's Dirty Little Secret' in the trade. Storage of electricity is an issue, but a lot of that can be negated by storage as thermal energy i.e. in concrete, water, phase change materials. We can also reduce usage by 30% easily, 50% with a lot of work and probably down to 40% of today's use with serious legislation and investment. That is before we start looking at international supergrids and, the real hard one, societal changes i.e. live near your work (it is barmy that some people commute 100's of miles a week).

We currently have 8 nuclear power plants that supply a net power of 8700 MW. Assuming they work 100% of the time, that is 76212000 MWh/year. PV can yield about 10,000 MWh/km2.year. So that would be 7,621.2 km2 of land UK has a land area of 242,495 km2 So to replace nuclear with PV would requite 3.1% of England's land. Urbanisation is about 9% of UK land. Housing is about 2% of UK's land. Agricultural land is 69% of UK's land area. Bio-fuel accounts for 1% of arable land usage. Until 1992, set-aside was set at 15% of area for large producers, reduced to 10% in 1996. This was reduced to 0% after then, but other incentives to 'not farm' were introduced. It may be better at look at the costs and times involved when comparing nuclear and PV. A PV 'farm' can be planned, built and be producing in 3 years at about £1m/MW. Nuclear seems to be taking 25 year at around £9m/MW (figures need verifying) In 25 years a solar farm of 1MW capacity would have produced around 22,000 MWh of energy. The nuclear 0 MWh. PV can be distributed but Nuclear can't. (as usual my figures need checking as I get confused when dealing with kWh, MWh, GWh, TWh and PWh, it is easy to get them muddled).

Nor me. But having been to @Joe90's and @JSHarris's places, I notice a similarity. Large kitchens one side, living room other side, separated by hall/stairs/corridor/extra room. Similar upstairs. Master bedroom/en-suite on one side, spare rooms other side. Landing in-between. Just like it should be. Both done without an architect too.

There are figures available from the Office of National Statistics that show usage. Here is a link to a report that shows some typical regional figures, including E7, which is useful for heat loads and DHW loads. http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171766_321960.pdf But it really comes down to doing sensible estimates based on the typical usage. As for PV, just design it in from the start, but make sure that the local DNO can approve it. Batteries, why, they are too expensive, limited life and better off left to the DNO/Energy companies to develop. People get very excited about them, I don't know why. If you really want to use batteries, and save energy costs, then give an electric car with each purchase/lease. That will have the biggest impact at the lowest cost. I monitor my energy usage, it is easy as I am all electric, I hate Pie charts, but I do keep a record of the day/night split.

I will do the on-site catering for a reasonable fee, say £250k/year. Will even get fresh milk and bread rolls for you.

The YMCA was tame compared to the Queensway Club, trust me on that. Who ever said that working in the Health and Leisure industry was glamours. It stank, literally.

Probably not except distraction therapies. As an ex climber, you know that our joints don't ache, even when your muscles are screaming. The fear of failure, and the potential consequences, are a much greater distraction. Now I am off to the woods for a coffee.

Except it doesn't https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/does-glucosamine-really-work/ And that is just one meta analysis, there are many more. I really do wish that witchcraft was not supported at all.

If only they were. I have seen way too many nastry things in the filters. Worse job I have done was cleaning the YMCA Sheffield spa bath filter.

There are a couple of architects on the forum. Let's see if they comment.

That's racial stereotyping. Happens down here too. I find a verbal kicking more effective

I think that is down to local topology and cooler air in the mornings. There are two ways to look at this problem. Matching Usage Maximising Revenue. Maximising revenue is the easy and cheaper option. As the FiT is set on the installed capacity and nothing else, what is to stop people having a larger system i.e. more modules, that disconnect at set times during the day. So assuming you have room, cash and will, you could have 12 kWp of modules fitted. 4 kWp on the East, 4 kWp on the South and 4 kWp on the West and a time stitch that changes over the modules as the sun moves across the house i.e Dawn to 10AM for the East, 10AM to 2PM for the South and 2PM to sunset for the West. Not exactly in the spirit of the FiT, but may be within the law.

About 9p now and 25p/kWh day rate. Getting close to not being worthwhile anymore.

The cloud is on its way, my glorious sunshine as vanished.

I think you are asking the wrong question really. But after a quick look on the internet, both Warmcell and Rockwool CAN have the same R-Value and Density. So that means they can have the same thermal properties, the airtightness may vary. That should have been taken car off anyway by your basic construction method.

Some people get really excited about the technology of PV. But the important issue is how much sun hits your array. Have a quick look on PVGIS, change the angles and module types and see what differences you get. When I changed the technology types for my location, I get no difference. So go for the cheapest module per kWp.

@readiescards Do you feel virtuous that you exported nearly 39 kWh of green electrons for the good of others?

We don't get the best down here. They seem to fall into two categories: Surfers Waiting to be retired The whole health service down here is now in special measures. I have met quite a few professional, from a few different industries, down here, and they are all amazed at the social deprivation and very poor economy. There is a strong correlation between poor health and low income.