MikeSharp01

Time we started a bit of gentle lobbying perhaps. Here is a note I have just sent to the BBC Today programme to ask them to ask an appropriate minister. "Here is a question you might like ask of an appropriate minister if they continue to say that the only route to cheaper electricity is to increase renewable generation. While I agree we should be increasing renewable generation there is a problem lurking at the core of this statement from government. The chart above is from this document (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/675c0ca798302e574b915336/eep-report-2023-2050.pdf) published in December 2024 by Ed Miliband's department. It clearly shows that we will be using as much gas in 2050 as we are using now to generate electricity despite a massive increase in renewables. This means that unless the link between the gas price and the electricity price is broken the price for electricity will still be set by Gas. How does the minister square this circle? If we are going to delink why don't we do it now - perhaps it is because the renewable generators are getting a great price for their electricity. If we are not delinking how will the electricity prices not be tied back to a fossil fuel with all that entails. " Let's see if anything comes of it.

the menu will probably have a setting to fix the speed of the RS485 connection and get its address, if not use 9600 Bps and 1 and see what gives. You will need something like this (https://thepihut.com/products/rs232-rs485-to-rj45-ethernet-serial-server-poe-port) to talk to it and an ethernet connection to plug it into the RS485 wire can be as long as you need - even Buckingham palace does not extend so far that RS485 won't reach.

It looks like something has got to give as things are unsustainable. That report from Mr Milibands department in December clearly shows that we will still be burning as much gas as we are today although as a smaller proportion of overall generation. So it follows that gas will still set the price unless it is delinked from doing so. Given we assume that the department knows what it is doing the calculation must be that at some point the link will need to be broken by some means as yet unknown. This brings us back to what @SteamyTea says might be a tactic in the minds of the windfarm builders to push this date back so they can make hay while the wind blows.

No Apparently you don't need any more up there. According to your man from Octopus the marginal cost of production up there is something silly like 7p kWh but the companies get paid something like 12p kWh just to keep them turned off. Its all madder than a mad things mad thing!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce848g8l8vro Looks like we won't get this wind farm after all. While I heard again today that the only way to get cheaper electricity is to get away from fossil fuels and I recall that graph referred to last week, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/675c0ca798302e574b915336/eep-report-2023-2050.pdf, that says we will still be using gas in 2050! How can we square this circle.

Ah I forgot to say that it is a separate filtered tap. Cold only which we will use for kettle, food water etc. Otherwise two PRVs is not a problem?

It must be pain points.

Am trying to follow this for our G3 central plumbing install. In the recent thread on precharge for a uvc you have a few PRVs around the place so not sure quite why there are so many and how, if there is one, any water softener gets into the circuit. I was thinking: 1. Stop cock (25 to 22) 2. NON return valve 3. Drain cock 4. T to external tap 4. Prv to step down from 7 bar to 4. 5. Isolating valve. 6. T off to A. Water Softener B. To kitchen potable tap. A.1 Isolating valve. A.2 Softener A.3 Isolating valve. A.4 Multi Block set at 3 bar adjacent to UVC Then out to all cold feeds and on to UVC. Is that the right place for the Softener,? Will the the two PRVs fight each other - can't see how?

No they didn't - just good jobbing architects who had done three houses on our hill and we liked one of them very much so we included them in the list to be 'interviewed' as I mention there were places where they did not get the self build ideal but Buildhub has worked its magic on most of those questions already.

We used an architect for our design upto building control (BC). We were very happy with the work they did and we had told them we would not be going past BC. This said they were not that aware of self building of our sort, as @nod has described, so some aspects got a bit lost. The main one being describing the details as they assumed a competent builder would just do it so leaving gaps which took us a long time to work out and still appear on occasions. So I get the impression there is a gap there. Also in our case the architects had not done a passive house (PH) beforehand so although they got the contract I did the PH courses so I could feed in the expertise so they did not design a house that could not be built to PH standards. So that is another gap worth looking at.

Yes sorry another wrinkle in the unit's naming rules / conventions. M for Mega (1,000,000) as it distinguishes it from m for milli....

How do 2012 prices relate to today's prices? On Export Octopus you get £0.15 for each kWh of export so £150 for a mWh in today's money!

Should we add this wrinkle, not the details but the fact of where the GSE account is, to the Git site?

Sounds like fun and a recipe for disaster unless you can seriously control that hole - pile round the internal perimeter, and so stop the scheme undermining your foundations. Still what do I know, a soil mechanic / ground works expert will be along shortly and will hopefully tell me I am talking tosh!

Yes thought that might have been the case, thanks for looking