DavidFrancis

Our local wildlife trust uses these "tree poppers", but don't know where they get them from. I've used them a fair bit and they work well on saplings

Thanks for the replies @pdf27 and @TerryE I guess I was being thick, but the design of that graphic made it look like the losses came after the energy had already departed the power stations and I was thinking the conversion losses happened when changing voltages or going from AC to DC or vv. One of the accompanying tables to the DUKES report gives fuel-used to electricity-generated figures by fuel type and these give the following efficencies: Coal 33.4% Oil 36.5% Gas 48.5% Nuclear 39.9% Thermal renewables 36.9% Solar & wind are given as 100%

According to the latest DUKES report from the goverment, we lose more than 50% of our electricity generation in "conversion, transmission & distribution losses". I never seem to hear anything about what's been done to reduce those losses. Anyone know? https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1094628/DUKES_2022_Chapter_5.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjLsJ3R17f8AhWSdcAKHdMVCR0QFnoECAoQAQ&usg=AOvVaw1Lf32nQsybhTjyvh6DJ4Nd

Thanks for the answers. Bought a Torbecks and got it to fit (just) after cutting down the spindle for the flushing lever. Thought the valve was broken at first as lifting the float lever doesn't have an immediate effect. Didn't realise it needed to build a vacuum. Just got a leak to fix now.

Not done much plumbing stuff before and have a problem with the fill valve. The previous valve was so old it broke-up as I tried to replace an O-ring. The old valve stem has a lean on it - see picture - and has a metal arm. This enabled it to fit beside the siphon and for the arm to reach over the siphon. I bought a new fill valve but the bottom entry ones all seem to have a plastic arm and this now catches on the siphon and won't operate properly - see picture. This is in part because the back of the cistern now pushes the valve body out, when the "fat" part of the old valve body used to sit in the wider section of the cistern at the side. Has any one else encountered this problem, or do I have an unusually shaped cistern?

Google reckons it could be Himalayan honeysuckle.

Don't remember seeing test pots. Could try ringing Bedec?

I like Bedec MSP. Doesn't need a primer or undercoat. Lasts well. Goes on OK for me. Been using it for the last six or so years. Not repainted anything yet. Also used Sadolin Classic stain on some cladding. That on the shaded side is still good after nine years. On the side with more sun I gave it a recoat last year.

On Valspar paint, see this story https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-40655163

You say the gutter is currently covered over. To me, this would seem to be the cause?! (Water running down the brick/flint.)

We got quite a few quotes recently for PVC and ali-clad and Russell Timbertech were a competitive price. Shame they only do installation on big jobs - or so they told me.

I was referring to the felt you linked to. As is often the case, I was not sure what Tony was talking about. Now see it is an undertile felt, which is something new to me. By coincidence Iko are based only a couple of miles from here.

I used that Iko felt on a shed a couple of years ago. Thought it was rather flimsy. Used some Icopal Xtra-Gard this year and thought it more robust.

I nearly had Peter Cox treat one of our bedrooms as the floor joints had woodworm holes, but then I did some reading, and just checked for new frass every couple of years. Not spotted anything yet. Joists are at sub 15%, some sub 10%, moisture, so pretty happy everything is OK.

I'm not sure if you got my point. Apologies if you did. See here, for example, for the differences between heartwood and sapwood https://www.thesprucecrafts.com/heartwood-or-sapwood-for-your-projects-3536898. Because sapwood generally has a higher moisture content, it is much more susceptible to decay from rot or insects. A large piece of timber is likely to be mostly heartwood and so could still be pretty good from a structural point of view. That Peter Cox article isn't too bad, but you need to be very careful with woodworm "experts". There's been a great deal of mis-selling and over-treatment from people in the wood preservation and damp treatment business. I think these articles provide some useful info: https://buildingconservation.com/articles/woodworm/woodworm.htm and https://buildingconservation.com/articles/envmon/timber_decay.htm