Gas boiler ban looking doubtful

[nod]

It looks like the government are starting to backtrack 

All the contractors and most of the HP fitters think the 2025 new build date is optimistic at best 

[Conor]

Yep, there isn't enough knowledge out there in the industry. My electricians had never worked on a house that had an ashp and had to be spoon fed the electric requirements. 2030 would seem a more realistic target.

[nod]

I agree

i worked on a group of heavily subsidized homes back in 2008 that ASHP

id never heard of them before 

Only come across the odd ones on one off homes since 

Nearly all the site heating and electrical no less than I do 

and that’s saying something 

[SteamyTea]

I would be concerned employing an electrician who could not work out the wiring for an ASHP from the manufacturers manual.

Seems to say more about plumbers and electricians than the technology.

[nod]

1 minute ago, SteamyTea said:

I would be concerned employing an electrician who could not work out the wiring for an ASHP from the manufacturers manual.

Seems to say more about plumbers and electricians than the technology.

Or the government making promises that they had no intention of keeping 

[Ronan 1]

I don't like the idea of the government banning anything anyway, Its no way to achieve anything. Why don't they make the preferred alternatives the preferable option through correct investment and proper incentives, those that are converted in this manner are alot more likely to embrace the whole eco friendly ethos to their whole build than someone who feels they have been cheated out of their preferred heating option by a government deadline.

[Mr Punter]

I think that a tax on gas and heating oil could be used to persuade people, but you may need to subsidise electric with the proceeds.

[newhome]

We’ll get it introduced into Scotland no doubt now that the SNP have agreed a power sharing deal with the Green Party. They are now talking up a transition away from fossil fuels. Oh the irony given the prominence of the (over inflated) oil price in the SNP’s independence white paper. With so many here being employed in the oil and gas industries in jobs that are generally well paid (and thus contribute to significant tax income for Scotland) I wonder what effect that will have on Scotland’s economic policy. 

 

[Dave Jones]

of course its being kicked into the long grass. There isn't an alternative available for same cost that wouldn't involve freezing to death the poor.

[nod]

I’m just wonder what will happen to all the natural gas we have If there are no gas powered boilers or stations 

Why are BG reviewing miles of gas mains 

Perhaps they didn’t believe government plans to get rid of gas from homes and businesses 

[Dave Jones]

Gas isn't go anywhere for the next 75 years minimum, the planning involved, the replacement and upgrading of homes, electric network etc will take decades as people will just not put up with switching to an inferior solution that impacts on neighbours quality of life and costs 10x more.

 

In reality the oil burners will be subsidised out first at huge cost to the taxpayer then in 20 years once they are done homes will need to be brought upto modern insulation standards then after another 20-30 years it can be looked at again.

 

 

[SteamyTea]

1 hour ago, Dave Jones said:

will take decades as people will just not put up with switching to an inferior solution that impacts on neighbours quality of life and costs 10x more.

Still trolling then.

[epsilonGreedy]

17 hours ago, Mr Punter said:

I think that a tax on gas and heating oil could be used to persuade people, but you may need to subsidise electric with the proceeds.

 

 

In practical terms you are proposing to tax the poor and make the rich richer.

[SteamyTea]

15 hours ago, nod said:

Why are BG reviewing miles of gas mains

They may have to for safety and future investment.

They may, for instance, be looking at the feasibility of pulling cables through them. Large point to point pipework may be used as hydrogen transporting, or even water.

18 hours ago, Mr Punter said:

I think that a tax on gas and heating oil could be used to persuade people, but you may need to subsidise electric with the proceeds.

Alternatively just increase, via taxation, all energy prices. It is, when you think about energies utility value, very, very, cheap. You can't get a person, or an ox, to accelerate a tonne a metre, every second, but a kWh can potentially do that for 5p.

 

This debate has been going on for over 45 years (since the oil crisis). It always gets hijacked by non energy criteria i.e the poor paying more, we need to use less, of everything, the rich won't care, they can afford it.

As Bill Clinton said a few years ago about climate change, "we will still be arguing when we are sitting on a raft in the Atlantic".

Edited August 29, 2021 by SteamyTea

[Ferdinand]

1 hour ago, epsilonGreedy said:

 

In practical terms you are proposing to tax the poor and make the rich richer.

 

Depends what else you do to mitigate. There is, for example, a current proposal for a 'social tariff'.

 

I'd put a carbon tax on everything based on emissions, which would simplify it very much. And gradually turn against gas as electricity is decarbonised.

 

We have just had a god-almighty media and political flap about a rise in energy prices, yet they are still *after* the flapping around 25% *below* the real level they were at around 2013.

 

4 hours ago, Dave Jones said:

Gas isn't go anywhere for the next 75 years minimum, the planning involved, the replacement and upgrading of homes, electric network etc will take decades as people will just not put up with switching to an inferior solution that impacts on neighbours quality of life and costs 10x more.

 

In reality the oil burners will be subsidised out first at huge cost to the taxpayer then in 20 years once they are done homes will need to be brought upto modern insulation standards then after another 20-30 years it can be looked at again.

 

I see no reason to subsidise anything out, beyond what has been done previously. I can see a case for ramping up some current projects by volume, though.

 

The normal replacement cycle for heating is 10-15 years for gas, and whatever it is for oil fired. So one thing we need is to insist on upgrades when these are replaced.

 

A ban from 2035 seems quite reasonable,  but I am concerned that the current Govt are running scared and risk defecating on their own relatively good record as emissions-reducers.

 

As for relatively rich people in older properties demanding money from the relatively poorer population to make up for their own neglect to invest in properly maintaining/upgrading their own properties in the past - I find that quite obscene. We probably need some quite heavy Pigou taxes, such as higher rates of Stamp Duty or an extra band of Council Tax for poor quality properties from an efficiency point of view.

 

And it needs to be in the Owner Occupied sector, as that is where the slum properties gather now.

 

18 hours ago, newhome said:

We’ll get it introduced into Scotland no doubt now that the SNP have agreed a power sharing deal with the Green Party. They are now talking up a transition away from fossil fuels. Oh the irony given the prominence of the (over inflated) oil price in the SNP’s independence white paper. With so many here being employed in the oil and gas industries in jobs that are generally well paid (and thus contribute to significant tax income for Scotland) I wonder what effect that will have on Scotland’s economic policy. 

 

 

Yes - they need to catch up on this one ?.

 

They are ahead on setting a timescale for requiring decent energy efficiency in OO properties, though. The Govt in London are dragging their feet, though Rishi shows signs of addressing this.

 

F

[SteamyTea]

10 minutes ago, Ferdinand said:

Pigou taxes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pigovian_tax

 

If parliament wants to help the poorest, take this off fags, booze and gambling.

 

[nod]

33 minutes ago, SteamyTea said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pigovian_tax

 

If parliament wants to help the poorest, take this off fags, booze and gambling.

 

You missed free sky tv also ?

[SteamyTea]

1 minute ago, nod said:

You missed free sky tv also ?

Not the TV, it is the offensive adverts selling tat to the uneducated and stupid.

I want public information broadcasts again. A simple widening before and after adverts.

"Don't be a moron"

Unless it is in Liverpool, then.

"Don't be a (expletive deleted)"

[epsilonGreedy]

It is interesting that 2025 is a crunch point year for generation capacity in the UK with the delayed Hinckley C programme no longer coming online that year.

 

I warned two years ago in this forum that we were brewing up the conditions for a UK Chernobyl in the mid 2020's. Half of our aging nuclear generation capacity is scheduled to be retired over this period while at the same time we are adding additional load due to ASHPs and EVs.

 

There will be pressure put on the management of these old nuclear stations to extend operations for a few more years and it would be difficult for a chief engineer facing unemployment to quantify the marginal risk of running a nuke station for another 2 years. 

[SteamyTea]

Rather than speculating, here is some historical data from the ONS.

 

For the last 60 years, the UK has almost always (3 day week and other industrial action being the exception) managed to over supply by 7.5%, on average.

In recent years this oversupply has got larger.  I don't believe that is a coincidence and it is only armchair speculators and keyboard worrier that think they really know what is happening.

[Oz07]

This forum will always be biased to low energy usage. There are a lot here that have invested considerable time and effort to make their houses as efficient as possible. Nothing wrong with that but whether it makes pure financial sense when it's so cheap to heat houses I'm not so sure. I can't see gas going anywhere any time soon in Leicestershire I would bet the majority of our housing stock is solid wall with terrible efficiency. 

[Ferdinand]

4 hours ago, epsilonGreedy said:

It is interesting that 2025 is a crunch point year for generation capacity in the UK with the delayed Hinckley C programme no longer coming online that year.

 

I warned two years ago in this forum that we were brewing up the conditions for a UK Chernobyl in the mid 2020's. Half of our aging nuclear generation capacity is scheduled to be retired over this period while at the same time we are adding additional load due to ASHPs and EVs.

 

There will be pressure put on the management of these old nuclear stations to extend operations for a few more years and it would be difficult for a chief engineer facing unemployment to quantify the marginal risk of running a nuke station for another 2 years. 

 

Given that  nuclear regulation is independent and statutory, I think that "Chernobyl incoming" is a little overwrought.

 

I note that we have 2 gas power stations mothballed with 2/3 the capacity of Hinckley Point C, and that energy demand has been significantly falling for 20 years now.

 

 

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1007132/DUKES_2021_Chapters_1_to_7.pdf

[SteamyTea]

49 minutes ago, Oz07 said:

This forum will always be biased to low energy usage.

I think that there is a larger question here:

It the forum biased to low energy or low emissions?

 

The easy and cheap way to lower emissions is to use less, but there is a limit how low one can go.  Some things need a fixed amount of energy to perform correctly/safely.

The last 5 days I have used 4 kWh/day to run my house.

Edited August 29, 2021 by SteamyTea

[Oz07]

18 minutes ago, SteamyTea said:

I think that there is a larger question here:

It the forum biased to low energy or low emissions?

 

The easy and cheap way to lower emissions is to use less, but there is a limit how low one can go.  Some things need a fixed amount of energy to perform correctly/safely.

The last 5 days I have used 4 kWh/day to run my house.

Not sure but when I have a 30 min shower the last thing on my mind is energy or emissions. I could be brown bread tomorrow. I think a certain amount is good as you end up with a comfortable home. Likewise next time I build and whack aircon in I won't be bullied into feeling guilty by moody teenage girls

[ProDave]

14 hours ago, Ferdinand said:

 

Given that  nuclear regulation is independent and statutory, I think that "Chernobyl incoming" is a little overwrought.

 

I note that we have 2 gas power stations mothballed with 2/3 the capacity of Hinckley Point C, and that energy demand has been significantly falling for 20 years now.

 

 

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1007132/DUKES_2021_Chapters_1_to_7.pdf

That's an interesting graph, but must be total energy not just the electricity generation?

 

But it shows we were only able to phase out coal because of reduced demand, NOT because the coal generation has been replaced with an equal capacity of something else that is less polluting.