Vastly lower real world energy requirements than the Heat Pump tool kit spreadsheet suggest. Should i trust the sheet?

[DanDee]

12 hours ago, JamesPa said:

 

I wouldn't give up quite yet.  Its not obligatory to have MCS to install a heat pump.  Its only obligatory if you want to install under permitted development (PD) or a government grant.  So one possible route, the route I am attempting to follow, is to seek express planning consent for the installation even though it could be done under PD, and then just self install or get a non-mcs plumber to install (assuming you can find one).

 

The problem I have encountered with this route, is that my LPA has imposed unachievable (and wholly unnecessary) noise constraints (10dB below background, in an area where background is totally inaudible indoors).  These go well beyond those which would be required under PD.  I have been fighting with them for the past 3 months, and they have finally conceded that they could relax the constraint, but only if I submit another planning application (£204), an application for the variation of a condition (£234), or appeal the decision (£0, but it takes 30+ weeks).  They have even gone so far as to suggest that I could install without permission and the probability of enforcement action is very low, albeit that they (obviously) could not recommend this. 

 

I don't blame the individual planning officers or the LPA for this obvious nonsense, successive government-imposed cuts to local councils means that the LPA has, for many years, been unable to recruit adequate staff numbers, unable to train the staff adequately, and unable to pay the salary necessary to attract away from developers any but those willing to make significant sacrifices in their own personal wealth in order to benefit the cause of public service.  Unfortunately that's the absolutely inevitable consequence of a government which prioritizes tax cuts over effective public service.  

 

The relationship between MCS and permitted development in relation to heat pumps is, in my view, a disgrace.  Because of the way MCS (a non-governmental body) have written MCS-020, they have imported into planning legislation matters which belong only in building regulations or consumer protection, and in doing so created a near-monopoly.  I can tolerate such things when government grants are involved, but not when they affect planning legislation which relates (or should relate) to the effect on others only or on very strategic matters. 

 

For my ASHP installation I am probably going to submit another planning application, although I resent the cost.  My fear is that either the planning officer or the environmental health officer will change during the interim, and I will be back to the start.

 

Incidentally I am having similar problem to that you quote with my plan to extend my solar panel installation.  Solar is currently a boom industry again, and so lots of companies have sprung up offering 'ready made solutions'.  That's fine, unless your needs don't fit their 'quick fix, quick buck' model.  I am still hoping to find a niche player who isn't in this 'sell your solution and make a quick buck come what may' business.  If not the remaining possibility is that the market will eventually cool again, and then only those who can be responsive to actual customer needs will survive.

 

 

 

 

If I would install a HP that falls into MCS approved list(all of them prob), I wouldn't bother with paying extra taxes. A HP installed through MCS or private does the same noise.

[sharpener]

7 hours ago, JamesPa said:

 

All of the above is pretty unlikely to arise if, in fact, there is no noise or minimal nuisance caused.

 

The other risk of course comes when you sell the house.  If the conveyancer is on the ball and checks for planning consents, they will find there is none and no amount of spreadsheets that they don't understand is likely to convince them.  This could conceivably cause a hiccup or, if the buyer were particularly risk averse, a withdrawal (although the buyer could probably insure against the risk and ask you to pay the premium).

 

if you were installing a gas boiler with noisy flue adjacent to your neighbours window, or a noisy oil boiler ditto, you could just go ahead without all of this discussion and speculation.  

 

Thanks for all this. Will read the MCS spec with particular attention to the noise requirements, are there any other booby-trap areas it would be wise to follow? Am confident my general plumbing and wiring will pass muster and it will not be a split or need a new HW cylinder so no FGAS or G3 (unless it is required for a buffer tank?)

 

I have got a still open case with Building Control which will cover the HP so a potenial buyer should be happy with that. But judging by their expertise on battery/inverter systems "you clearly know what you are doing and it all looks OK to me" I am not shaking in my boots, they didn't know there was an IET Code of Practice let alone inspect to it.

 

Have been down the insurance on house sale route, the buyer wanted me to insure against the risk that the 1m front fence would be found to infringe a covenant limiting the height to 3 feet dating from when the building plot was sold in 1880 FGS! Cost me £50 so I removed a heated towel rail which wasn't on the list of F&F.

 

Yes, current neighbours had their boiler renewed a few years back. The flue is right in an internal corner, the final section is on the squint, there is pluming past my study window and a smell of gas. Unfortunately they are immune to protests about this kind of thing.

[JamesPa]

1 hour ago, sharpener said:

Thanks for all this. Will read the MCS spec with particular attention to the noise requirements, are there any other booby-trap areas it would be wise to follow?

I think that if you follow the MCS noise calculation and then all the other stuff in the actual PD regs you are as safe as you can be  (without actually getting an MCS designer/Installer to do the job) from a planning perspective.  The MCS noise calculations are easy and there is a spreadsheet on the MCS website to do them.

 

As I still haven't actually installed my ASHP yet for the reasons above I don't feel qualified to comment on other booby traps.  Others here will though.

 

 

 

 

[sharpener]

Thanks. Have now found yr other thread and agree with you why on earth did they not specify corrected sound power from the HP as 37.7 dB and cut out the Steps 7 to 9 malarkey, they are completely pre-determined and add nothing.

 

The very coarse steps in the distance correction are annoying too, it's not difficult to calculate the distances corresponding to 1 dB increments (many moons ago I used to design recording studio equipment) and rounding the distances down per the table can result in some big jumps.

 

Fortunately the calcs for the Grant or CoolEnergy 10kW machines seem to give a good result for the neighbour's window ~8m away, though the Grant might need a strategically-sited fence panel.