Alan Ambrose

Also: "man whose wealth depends significantly on electric vehicle sales encourages large tariffs on competing vehicles from China" >>> But what if we changed the model so the wholesale price is the average of the sources rather than the highest price? Well, I suppose the gas peakers would decide that they couldn't be bothered to start up - which would make life .... difficult. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/jan/29/gas-fired-plants-uk-lights-on-cost-profits-energy-crisis I guess, in principle, high profits to renewables providers should encourage them to continue to build out quickly and squeeze the peakers out of business and/or encourage storage suppliers (pumped hydro, grid scale batteries etc) to invest more. Presumably hydro and nuclear electricity from abroad also helps stabilise the market and keep it honest?

>>> Reforming the energy market to get rid of the "last unit sets price" method would be a huge win for electricity. Something I've seen referred to bit on 't 'ub together with its relationship to gas prices rather than, say, PV prices. Possible to explain a bit?

Yeah, we don't have the detailed data to come to a firm conclusion (e.g. private houses & low EPC & not-listed vs. social renters & high EPC & in a conservation area etc.) But it's reasonable to think that most places heated by electricity might realistically have heat pumps as long as they're not (a) rented or (b) flats or (c) have a high EPC and low energy usage already, or (d) listed or in a conservation area and (e) where the owners are wealthy enough and have the time and energy to put up with the disruption and (f) don't intend to move with a few years and (g) are prepared to take the leap of faith that (i) the government won't suddenly change the rules around and (ii) the structure of the power markets won't change substantially for the life of the heat pump investment. That's a lot of ifs and buts, and I think an explanation why HP take-up isn't high even amongst the people who might benefit most from it. The 'analysis' isn't rocket surgery .

My hairdresser tells me that in Japan, most buildings are designed for 50 years life and then they are expected to be replaced. Had dinner at some friends who have a little listed cottage. The bemused owner, who had done a bit of an insulation refurb, had BC and the conservation people arguing back-and-forth what could and couldn't be done. That is, they hadn't even begun to figure out what was possible in that circumstance. I think it might end up with the rich people owning the great looking old places with dodgy insulation and laughing off the energy bill; the middle classes hanging onto their gas boilers for as long as possible and the lower classes getting shafted as usual. Plus ça change. p.s. and the small % of people who install heat pumps will be (a) people who have been misled, (b) buildhubbers and (c) enthusiatic gadget people, who own recently built homes by the mass-builders with gas boilers, that didn't get heat pumps when they were built.

Can you see - is there any foundation under the brick 'plinth' wall anywhere? I'm thinking something that looks like a rough concrete wall maybe 3/4m deep with crushed stone underneath it. That is, is that hole an isolated problem, or is it the same along the entire plinth and there's no foundation at all?

OK, some stats: + 19% of homes are privately rented, 17% 'socially rented', that's 36% i.e. ~1/3rd of homes where the landlord would have to pay for the installation (including a rental void period) with the financial benefit of lower heating costs accruing to the tenant. That going to happen very rarely. + overlapping with that, 22% of dwellings were flats. Yeah, realistically impossible for flat owners to install ASHPs. + overlapping with that, 31% of dwelings in UK have no EPC rating (only required since 2007). We can reasonably conclude that they are mostly old enough to have sub-standard insulation and therefore not suitable for an ASHP. + overlapping with that, about 50% of homes that have EPCs are D or below and are probably not suitable for ASHPs. + overlapping with that, 74% of households use gas (plus 5% using oil) and therefore don't have any financial incentive to change. + of houseowners, 15% of private owners without mortgages are poor (Joseph Rowntree Foundation) and 17% of those with mortgages i.e. they don't have enough money to invest. + 2% of homes are listed and there are 10,000 conservation areas - both of which are either unsuitable or impossible to swap to an ASHP. + we don't have any idea how all those segments overlap, but just from EPC ratings (or lack of them) 2/3rds of dwellings are not suitable for heat pumps, 3/4 have gas already and no incentive to change. (EPCs are, of course, nonsense anyway as the main insulation areas (roof, floor, walls) may just be 'assumed'.) + plus it requires personal energy, money, time and the ability to endure the disruption and uncertainty that installation of an ASHP would require. You may also have to battle at your expense with the planners, who have no incentive to be reasonable. + many people may just be sitting on the fence as they know that government doesn't always get it right (viz. diesel cars); technology may improve, installers may be better skilled etc.

Thanks. You need to get a licence to keep bats these days 😅?

I would think a simple non-material amendment at worst.

I’ve seen this mentioned a few times before, but don’t get how anyone builds a timber frame and timber clad house? Like a Scottish long house, for example, or anything from Heb Homes.

Like the design . I think some people just hate any change - particularly if it involves someone else getting to live in a nice house. Also because it makes them feel good that their views ‘matter’.

I think I’ve seen reports ‘ere on the ‘ub of BC requiring fairly minor internal changes to be run by the planners. If I remember, a change of position of a hot water cylinder (?). Does that sound correct?

>>> It doesn't make them corrupt Well they have a legal monopoly and refuse to be transparent about how their calculations are done, both of which are unforgivable in my book. The government should know better. Let the SAP & HP calculations be transparent and published as open source so that other competitors can get in on the act. And all the calcs need a thorough review and revamp. >>> They are a for profit organisation My 5 mins of research suggests that all their profits (well those that don't go in director's fees) go to the MCS charity.

OK updated map with LSB, so somewhere close to the stars in IP14? @Nick Laslett - since you know those 3 pubs , which one would you choose? Feb Thurs 6th, 7pm-ish?

Sounds v unlikely, that's why they made the developer remove the old buildings - exactly to preempt further development. Wildflower meadow maybe - may need less upkeep and should be good to look at?

Congrats. As a useful data point, what was the overall time from submission to decision?

Not due to dust or damp?

You have checked with Pilkington that they're going to supply this glass for 'perpetuity'? No?

Thanks. I might try the DIY approach as we don't have much in the way of wildlife or much in the way of lights planned. I have a camera there (Reolink Go Ranger) which spots bigger wildlife fairly well - well walker's dogs anyway. I've seen one ordinary newt hiding in the cap over one of our SI bores, birds in the hedge and a couple of sightings of vole or rat-like things. We also have a couple of molehills. I'm told there are muntjacs around but never seen any evidence. At our current place we have a light either side of the front door and that's about it apart from the xmas lights . @DownSouth - did you have some fancy light cone images in your doc?

@PNAmble - I just noticed your post. I want a set-up like yours. Can I ask: + the DNO and Openreach were ok with them in the same cabinet, or didn't they know? + you have your meter and main switch / fuse block somewhere else? + your little CU is the 'main distribution CU' to your garage, house etc with MCBs and no RCDs? Anything else you can tell us? Looks a good setup.

>>> or my behaviour is being discussed 😁

>>> But it would be liable for capital gains when you sell A From memory ... apportioned between the time you had it as a primary residence (tax free) and the time you rented it (CGT applies). There used to be a grace period, but I think that isn't the case now.

OK by great algorithmic genius (hmmm) ... using 1 star for 'living in', 1 for 'building in', 2 if you've only specified one place, I have this at present. So, anyone suggest a good pub in, say, IP14? Kings Arms in Haughley? The Bull in Bacton?

Suggest you read the threads here using "CIL Legislation" as the search term. The CIL legislation uses phrases like principal residence and sole or main residence. (You can always read the legislation yourself.) These don't seem to have been tested in the courts much yet (for CIL). IMO LPAs seem to make it up a bit re CIL and CIL teams are often quite aggressive, so they may fancy punting it in the courts. I have had one otherwise competant commercial property lawyer say to me "we can't advise re CIL" as though it were not part of property law. So, you could easily find yourself being a test case. Fine if you're OK with that. Of course, you could ask your LPA's CIL team first if you want to be sure ... but then you've put them on notice.

OK, we have permission now. It will probably take me months to recover from the PTSD caused by 1 year of purchase shenanigans and 2 years of planning BS. Most conditions are standard, but I was surprised to get this one below. The plot is in a hamlet in the countryside and currently a bit of old pasture with grass, 3 trees at the back, one old apple tree in the middle, and little else. Anyone had something similar? 5. Prior to the installation of any external lighting a "lighting design strategy for biodiversity" for development, the new building, and features or areas to be lit shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The strategy shall: a) identify those areas/features on site that are particularly sensitive for biodiversity likely to be impacted by lighting and that are likely to cause disturbance in or around their breeding sites and resting places or along important routes used to access key areas of their territory, for example, for foraging; and b) show how and where external lighting will be installed (through the provision of appropriate lighting contour plans and technical specifications) so that it can be clearly demonstrated that areas to be lit will not disturb or prevent the above species using their territory or having access to their breeding sites and resting places. All external lighting shall be installed in accordance with the specifications and locations set out in the strategy, and these shall be maintained thereafter in accordance with the strategy. Under no circumstances should any other external lighting be installed without prior consent from the local planning authority. Reason: To ensure that impacts on ecological receptors from external lighting are prevented

I believe that most LPAs ignore local objections unless there's a dozen or so. They assume a few people will always object and most of the 'objections' are not on planning grounds so they are ignored. I'm amazed that even 'nice, kind, worldly neighbours' often can't see beyond they're own petty interests - a lot 'want more houses to be built'. Yeah but not next to them.