RichardL

There's something needs to iron out on the economics and standards. If the DNO is happy with electrical standards for connection to the grid then the power companies should be also. My guess is the MCS thing is a smokescreen, power companies don't really want to pay for excess power, they're setup to sell products not buy them - once that changes MCS as a requirement for export payments will fade away. The power firms, retail, need to see buying micro generated power as a carrot rather than a stick.

Plants - couple of shrubs in that bed infant of it and you'll not see it after 6-12 months.

I hate this must have a degree thing. - there should be balance. While I'm in a so called professional desk job my late Dad was a Joiner, his Dad and brother bricklayers. He did an apprenticeship back in the day then ran the small family building firm. I always have the utmost respect for those that do - and try to learn what I can from them be it kitchen fitters, sparks or chipys, roof fitters etc. I certainly can't do what they do well enough and quickly enough to earn a living! That should be a thing in society - right to the top. The attitude must not be those that can't degree take up a trade - but absolute equivalence and respect for that path in life. (Sorry triggered my hobby horse there )

Defined by whom & who is the arbiter of equivalence - planners?

THIS ASHP (My experience so far) are head/shoulders quieter than the small rocket engine sound that is my oil boiler. 1.5m2 green box blasting away on the wall (oil) - vs quiet fan whirring away if you stand next to it (ASHP). iMHO PD should specify location, if visibility is an issue, and noise levels - taking into account they just need to be quieter than gas/oil. Note taken from waaay up the thread re sometimes front of house is a better location than back for sound - You'd need some constructive thinking to come up with the right sort of rules for typical street types.

...but hopefully at least if (ok they wont make it) but strategically - if homes/small businesses etc are on electric - the solution to getting off carbon shifts to national infrastructure which should be manageable then at a national scale with an order of magnitude or two fewer projects? The national level strategy of getting small (definition?) buildings off carbon doesn't seem terrible in that context. Otherwise its always chicken and egg: a. Don't move national elec gen off carbon because everyones burning carbon at home b. Don't move homes off carbon because national burns carbon to produce electric c. Iterate a->b, b->a, a->b..... net result do nothing. (I know lots of ifs/presume/assume)

I didn't check the rules again - I have it in my head you can build on 50% of the plot let after the original build (+ some constraints for PD re only 4m out from the primary elevation) (Plot - original house area) / 2 = space available The extending from the house thing is a separate constraint - theres a brochure somewhere on the govt. planning site that goes into detail with examples. Does that sound right?

+1 this - key rule of thumb => can you charge the batteries from your off peak window - driven by battery kWh and Inverter size. No point going larger than that. The above is basically the winter scenario/worst case/most expensive time of year and IMHO the one to optimise. Summer will be a bonus with solar topping things up meaning less grid charging up to possible no grid charging.

FWIW There are alternative install models - I've FFTP over poles / rural area. Its deff. FTTP - the fibre termination/modem etc inside the house running at nominal 900Meg.

First floor bedroom looks like it might be tight under the deep eaves? Can you move the bed back and the dressing room/ensuite into the loft space on the left to give the bed and surround more space? I'd 3d model that bit or cut out a card model with a human sized figure to check headroom. Ground floor - open up the kitchen diner into the living room on that dividing wall - doors or open plan perhaps? The living room looks like a good TV room but a bit of a porthole window thing going on?

That rule of thumb, if reasonable, is so much easier than the current MO of analyse heat loss in all rooms etc. I'm sure the latter is accurate, but if the former is close enough and based on real world heating requirements - thats the sort of thing any customer can also do to ball park the install size. IMHO That sort of - I can double check the 'expert/trader' & in my own mind confirm its the correct product process massively helps take-up.

The answer to that is way up in the thread - open the market to more than A2W, and for many smaller properties an A2A 2x inside unit multisplit will do the job of space heating. It even feels like normal heat - i.e. passes the 'I'm cold turn the heater on' => 'I'm warmer and the electric meter isn't going mad/cop 3+' Hot water then is the challenge - perhaps smart immersion (check the cones. on immersion vs A2W/built in cylinders) integrated with an open interface on the smart meter to trigger that heating at off peak - whatever that happens to be over time.

I started reading - but just saw ' ban, end, stop' over and over.... Doesn't feel like a free minimal state model - more like some sort of overlord dictator

Plus - If you have to employ someone to do drawings - double/trebble that number (guess). I spent a few weekends drawing up my own plans. TBH I'm interested in the process, documentation, bring a bit of school graphic communication skillets the fore with plans/elevations etc - if you weren't then it would be expensive in time and £ to hire someone to do it.

Yeah - I was emphasising visibility because I'm in an AONB, luckily not a conservation area, so assumed a lot of emphasis of the decision would be on whether the units be seen - by neighbours or general public... The '... road' in my application were originally explicit road names.

@S2D2 For full context - this is the response - granted a bit old now from 2021 - re the original unit permitted development - there is the MCS standards statement - I guess it was implicit that I was using equivalent standards - I used terms like qualified installer/qualified electrician etc. I guess this does depend on local govt. development principles etc - may be different where you live - I could refer to the gov.wales document in my original PD conversation. Apologies I've had to remove some links which identify exactly where I am -

@S2D2 £230 for householder planning, half that for a certificate if you are sure you are inside PD and just want confirmation, my lot are cheeky now and also want ~£100 just for a conversation with a planning officer for informal advice. Randomly in this part of the world you have to add to wildlife environments - hence the bird box requirement. The certificate approach usually doesn't need plans. TBH MCS wasn't mentioned either when I checked for the original PD unit, nor when this full application went through - is it a regional thing? Text of my application, this was accompanied by full elevation/site plan/location plan etc. Passed in Feb this year. Context --------- Continue projects to move the property away from Oil fired heating/hot water to sustainable options. The plan is to migrate to a combination of solar/battery and air source heat pump technologies. This proposal will complete the move of space heating away from Oil. Current situation ------------------- The property is currently heated with a combination of Oil boiler and one external air source heat pump unit. The air source heat pump was installed under permitted development terms, heating the timber frame half of the house & was successful in terms of functionality and costs over the winter months. The existing heat pump install was discussed informally with the planning dept. 1/2/21 and your colleague .... advised "...it is most likely that your proposals would be considered PD." - I proceeded on that basis with reference to the PD constraints he shared. I would like to expand the system. Proposed changes ---------------------- 1. Abide by Planning Policy Wales (PPW) 11 to enhance local wildlife and install a bird box 2-4m high on the north/east side of the Pear tree as indicated on the site block plan. 2. Install two external inverter/condenser units and discrete external trunking to supply heat to remaining rooms: The dining room, boot room and upstairs bedrooms. One additional unit sited at the back of the property. Mitsu..... Dimensions: w x h x d: 950mm x 330mm x 796mm Max noise level 51 dBA SCOP: 4:6-4:65 To heat: Boot room and upstairs bedrooms. Visibility: Front not visible from the ... road. Back not visible from the ... road. One additional unit sited near to the existing one next to the Lounge/Office area at the front of the property. Mitsu..... Dimensions: w x h x d: 800mm x 285mm x 550mm Max noise level 46 dBA SCOP: 3.74-4.2 To heat: Dining room. Visibility: Front not visible from passing traffic on ... road, units some visibility if standing at the front gate. Back not visible from the ... road.

Yes - no issues - no complaints from the various mandatory commenters - ward politicians, aonb, etc etc. It didn't even make it to a planning meeting - decided offline. Just took 3-4 weeks.

FWIW I went full planning for a second ASHP external unit - a second unit falls outside PD. The planners on a full planning application were interested in model numbers, but mostly noise and location of the noise relative to road/neighbours. The model numbers bit was interesting - planning doesn't usually go that level of detail - I guess they wanted the opportunity to double check sound levels advertised? My point being - IF sound is all that concerned them on full planning you'd have thought permitted development could potentially restrict itself to the same criteria: a. is it visible from the road/neighbours b. is it over (pick a number) 65dB => If no for both then PD All this MCS stuff seems overkill (sorry if I missed the point above)

Don't get it - if you're going planning i.e. abiding by the rules why would you then play a fast one by doing it anyway? My planners you can ask for advice for a lesser fee - basically they read & interpret the permitted development rules, or even a cert of permitted development again for a fee - the latter though if turned down and you do it anyway I would have thought you're asking for trouble.

Change vs. rate of change I suspect is widely not understood - in this scenario and all sorts of economic discussions. reference questions like 'when will inflation go back to normal and prices drop'. Even if it was learned at school - it goes out the window when you're cold. I suspect you won't fix that with education - something in the user interface has to change - can't say I know what - but if that can be cracked.... For heating somehow that lack of want for understanding needs factoring out.

Yes - I know exactly what you mean. Question I guess my question should have been - how much education is required for the end user to get their house warm? If on/off and thermostat (oft used as you point out as an on/off switch) is understood - it should be possible for the heating system to respond - and be seen to respond - when the owner says 'I'm cold' (or hot). Challenge The be-seen bit would appear to be the challenge on a slow burn type UFH A2W etc system vs. instant gratification of something being hot to the touch. The electrical draw is instant and visible on the smart meter - if the heat - the benefit isn't obvious - either as heat or indication its working then its going to feel like its not working. Most people don't care how heating works - don't/wont care how the newer technologies work - arguably don't need to care either. IMHO, thinking out loud, understanding how it works by the end user should not be a requirement / pre-req to moving off carbon and onto electric. The understanding step needs factoring out.

Perhaps - but is the model of turn the heating on when its cold - or simple automation with a thermostat a bad user interface? The user interface feels fine (to me/opinion ) - the trick is making the heating system do the right thing, and be felt to do the right thing, with the user/human requests above. How much education is required?

Agreed - not for temp control - more a few zones in the house for global heating on/off or broad zone (upstairs/living etc) on/off. Temp control is (probably) a more local or zone thermostat. On off for seasonal, or overnight - in my case I don't heat overnight - but absolutely that depends on your heating technology/building tradeoffs.

100% with you on this one - aligned as a target on my own system as I phase out Oil and Phase in A2A & IR panels etc. Multiple local thermostats - yes Single central clock and on/off switch across the various technologies - ideally yes