Looks like the party is over....

[MikeSharp01]

Phew - we got our approval through 3 weeks back via the Cool energy umbrella scheme and I hope they will allow that through! The HP has arrived as has the tank ( from Telford - via Trevor at cylinders to go) but it won't be commissioned for 6-8 weeks.

[SteamyTea]

4 hours ago, Oz07 said:

why do people buy premium cars

Status.

[sharpener]

5 hours ago, Oz07 said:

why do people buy premium cars?

 

Range. Wouldn't have bought an EV if it would not do a regular 270 mile journey without stopping to recharge. Even 3 years on there is still little choice.

 

Given that range is an over-riding property I would have thought even small cars would be more optimised for this factor. But no, even they are optimised for the living-room-on-wheels stuff instead and so weigh a lot more than necessary => shorter range (or larger more expensive battery). 

 

Who needs illuminated interior trim with a choice of colour for decor lines all round the cabin?

[JamesPa]

1 hour ago, SteamyTea said:

Status.

Indeed, and performance/features

 

People bought Teslas because they are cool, because they work, and because they could show off, not because they are cheap.  Of course their CEO's antics has rather messed that up.

 

It could be similar with heat pumps.  Done properly they will give you much more comfortable heating for less money (like mine does!), for which people will pay a considerable premium.  Furthermore done properly is actually the easiest and cheapest way to do it!  Heat pumps might even be 'cool'.  The installation industry needs to get its act together.

 

European heat pump manufacturing ditto IMHO.  I expect the Chinese could knock out a perfectly good heat pump for £500 and sell it for maybe sub £1000.  Its basically three motors, a low end processor, a bit of pipework and some bent steel.  I have a Vaillant which sells for >4K, Ideal about the same, and what planet are Stiebel Eltron and Nibe on with their pricing?

 

Im not advocating removing grants at the current time, but the fact is that even if it doesn't happen in the next couple of weeks it will happen in the next few years and the industry needs to work out how it will carry on on its own two feet.

 

Edited 10 hours ago by JamesPa

[JamesPa]

5 hours ago, HughF said:

Remove the stupid planning restrictions around outdoor condensers and just pivot to air-air for domestic heating - much cheaper, easier to fit, f-gas industry is already existing and the units are already ‘smart’ out of the box which apparently people want these days.

 

Sorry Im genuinely confused, which stupid regulations are these?  Is it the fact you can only have one under PD (two on a detached house?) or is it something else in the regulations that causes a problem?

Edited 9 hours ago by JamesPa

[Dillsue]

5 hours ago, Oz07 said:

I agree HP seem the way forward on a new build but I don't think you appreciate the level of understanding needed to install and run these things. You guys seem to take your scientific knowledge for granted and assume the layman posses the same. Your average householder just probably doesn't want all this COP, weather comp etc etc to deal with.

Your average householder shouldn't and likely doesn't need or want to understand COP/WC as that's the installers job. A user only needs to know basic scheduling of CH and DHW which is similar to a gas boiler.

 

The knowledge on this forum is generally no more than a competent installer should have but a layman has no need for.

[Redbeard]

I think it is undoubtedly true that grant availability can inflate prices in the short term, and not necessarily reduce them in the longer term. Cast your mind back to pre-2010, when there were PV grants for some years. These did little if anything to reduce costs to the consumer, and (IIRC) added a whole raft of costs via MCS. The grants were funded by DTI, not dept of energy, the idea being to enliven the industry and so reduce costs. It didn't happen discernibly under the grant regime, but it happened in the first year of the 'Clean Energy Cash-back' (the so-called 'feed-in tariff'). Now I don't think the MCS certification is going to (or should) go, as a proxy 'quality mark', so there will still be costs attached for installers, but if no grant means more 'fighting for customers' (in a nice way, and certainly not fighting *with* customers!) then prices may be driven down in a similar way.

[JamesPa]

19 minutes ago, Dillsue said:

Your average householder shouldn't and likely doesn't need or want to understand COP/WC as that's the installers job. A user only needs to know basic scheduling of CH and DHW which is similar to a gas boiler.

 

The knowledge on this forum is generally no more than a competent installer should have but a layman has no need for.

I think householders do need to understand WC at least a bit.  The probability that an installer has correctly set it up is small (particularly if the installation is in summer) and even if the installer has set it up correctly if the householder doesn't understand a bit about WC they wont understand why their radiators are rarely warm.  Its hardly a difficult concept though, water circulating through system,  is hotter when it colder outside and colder when its warm outside.

 

They dont need to understand scheduling of the CH though, just leave it on!

 

I do think interfaces need to get better.  The likes of Vaillant, who have had to cope with boilers featuring WC for a couple of decades  (because its been compulsory in some mainland European countries), have more or less got it; the interfaces for some of the far eastern machines are really poor.

 

 

 

Edited 7 hours ago by JamesPa

[MrPotts]

9 hours ago, HughF said:

Even if we do, it’s far more efficient to burn it in a CCGT, transmit the energy to the home as electricity, then run a heat pump with that electricity than it is to pipe the gas and then burn it in the home.

 

Breakeven point for efficiency is a scop of 2.8 iirc.

I think a scop of 4+ is needed to breakeven the cost of gas v's electricity.

[JohnMo]

8 minutes ago, MrPotts said:

I think a scop of 4+ is needed to breakeven the cost of gas v's electricity.

Really depends on tariff - I only need a cop of about 2, on Cosy with battery to plug gap between cheap periods.

 

But generally 4 with a normal flat tariff. But on energy monitor, people are getting SCoPs of 5 plus. A well sized heat pump with a decent modulation range, and running without buffer and open system on WC, should output an average CoP closer to 5.

[JamesPa]

35 minutes ago, MrPotts said:

I think a scop of 4+ is needed to breakeven the cost of gas v's electricity.

Not if you get a sensible tariff.  Also don't forget gas boilers are rarely set up to run efficiently because our heating industry never really bothered to understand condensing boilers.  Practical break even is more like 3.5.  Some may wish to factor the significant added comfort of an ASHP based system.

Edited 6 hours ago by JamesPa

[Dillsue]

46 minutes ago, JamesPa said:

I think householders do need to understand WC at least a bit.  The probability that an installer has correctly set it up is small (particularly if the installation is in summer) and even if the installer has set it up correctly if the householder doesn't understand a bit about WC they wont understand why their radiators are rarely warm.  Its hardly a difficult concept though, water circulating through system,  is hotter when it colder outside and colder when its warm outside.

 

They dont need to understand scheduling of the CH though, just leave it on!

 

I do think interfaces need to get better.  The likes of Vaillant, who have had to cope with boilers featuring WC for a couple of decades  (because its been compulsory in some mainland European countries), have more or less got it; the interfaces for some of the far eastern machines are really poor.

 

 

 

So long as installers do a reasonable job of heat loss calcs and emmitter sizing, HP manufacturers should have databases of WC settings that I'd have thought should be pretty near. I'm not sure if all HP controllers have this feature but our Therma V has an easily used feature to add or subtract a degree or 5 from the flow target temp which a householder could tweak if the installers settings were a tad out. All a user would need to know is not to be changing that adjustment in more than 1 degree steps and more frequently than every 12/24+ hours.

 

There's a bit to understand about CH scheduling as in how to setback temps if away, understand that it will automatically shutdown as it warms up outside and the change in function of a thermostat as a temp limiter, if there's one fitted. If theyre using a TOU tariff they'd need to know how to get the HP to make best use of that.

 

From a user's perspective I don't think they would need to know more than can be written on a single A4 sheet that the installer can explain in 15mins before they leave. That assumes the installer understands what they've just installed!!

[JamesPa]

2 minutes ago, Dillsue said:

From a user's perspective I don't think they would need to know more than can be written on a single A4 sheet that the installer can explain in 15mins before they leave. That assumes the installer understands what they've just installed!!

I'll drink to that (and I'm in the pub so I can!)

[Beelbeebub]

18 hours ago, Roger440 said:

We have had this convo before.

 

Theres lots of things that can be done. But they wont be.

Except there is some discussion of removing the green levies on elec hence the proposal to reduce the eligibility for the 7.5k grant (as they aren't proposing to stick the green levies on gas)

 

So the elec/gas ratio (which is the important metric) might fall from the current 4.2 times. 

 

Green levies make about 15% of the current elec price, so we"d drop from 26p to around 22p.  Assuming gas stays the same that's 3.5x ratio. 

 

That's an achievable SCOP and That"s before things like time of use tariffs which can drop the price even lower. 

[Beelbeebub]

10 hours ago, Oz07 said:

Why would you mandate the method of heating i just don't get it. It's like an ideology. If the technology is better it will naturally be taken up. If you have to start mandating it maybe its not the best choice ?

I mean you could just mandate an efficency of greater than 250%

 

But that does mean a heatpump of some description. 

 

I do agree we are being too dogmatic in going down the air to water route. 

 

Air to air would be a much better (and cheaper) route. 

[JamesPa]

7 minutes ago, Beelbeebub said:

So the elec/gas ratio (which is the important metric) might fall from the current 4.2 times. 

It was only 2.5:1 in 2011 and its been steadily growing since (until the Ukraine war made the ratios volatile.)

 

I find it very difficult to believe that this wasn't a largely political decision by the previous government.

Edited 5 hours ago by JamesPa

[MikeSharp01]

7 minutes ago, Beelbeebub said:

 (as they aren't proposing to stick the green levies on gas)

You do wonder a little tiny bit why not - as it would encourage people to move away from gas and towards electricity. The downsides are relatively unthinkable and the elephant in the room problem is that we don't have enough electricity to move to and too much of what we do have is made by burning gas.

[Beelbeebub]

10 hours ago, Oz07 said:

I don't agree else why do people buy premium cars? If panel heaters are as bad as made out then people would rip them out and fit radiators. If heat pumps are as good as people make out they would be fitted without mandates. I do agree they seem a logical solution in a well insulated property but I think people are blinded by their bias. No need for mandate if best solution. 

It's capital vs running costs. 

 

The house builder sees the capital costs and the running costs.are irrelevant to them except in so much as they might reduce the attractiveness of a property and hence the price.  But the property market being what it is the price is set by location rather than running costs.

 

 

[Beelbeebub]

6 minutes ago, MikeSharp01 said:

You do wonder a little tiny bit why not - as it would encourage people to move away from gas and towards electricity. The downsides are relatively unthinkable and the elephant in the room problem is that we don't have enough electricity to move to and too much of what we do have is made by burning gas.

There is a key point, the efficiency of converting gas to electricity is 40% (over 50% with the most modern plants running optimally). 

 

So if we all converted to electric radiators from gas boilers the net gas demand would shoot up. For every cubic meter saved from being burnt in a boiler 2.5 would be burnt at the power plant. 

 

Which is why Heatpumps are fundamental to the switch. 

 

As long as the heatpump is more than 250% efficient you end up using less gas by burning it in a power plant, transmitting it to a house and using a heat pump than by using a gas boiler. 

 

And (as a bonus) the heat pump doesn't care how you generate the elecreicty. It could come from wind, solar, imports, nuclear, wave, hydro - whatever you want.

 

Burning gas for heat and power isn't a long term option. 

 

I will caveat that with - I'm not dogmatic about never burning gas. I can see a future where we have more gas plant capacity than now but it is only used infrequently as a state level backup. The national equivalent of a generator and some petrol cans in your garage

 

 

[sharpener]

4 hours ago, JamesPa said:

and what planet are Stiebel Eltron and Nibe on with their pricing?

 

Same planet as Tesla customers I suppose. Prestige product, exclusive dealer network, similar marketing philosophy. All about bragging rights. Nothing to do with functionality.

[Beelbeebub]

4 hours ago, sharpener said:

 

Range. Wouldn't have bought an EV if it would not do a regular 270 mile journey without stopping to recharge. Even 3 years on there is still little choice.

 

Given that range is an over-riding property I would have thought even small cars would be more optimised for this factor. But no, even they are optimised for the living-room-on-wheels stuff instead and so weigh a lot more than necessary => shorter range (or larger more expensive battery). 

 

Who needs illuminated interior trim with a choice of colour for decor lines all round the cabin?

A bit off topic but I don't think people have range anxiety. 

 

They have refueling anxiety.

 

 

My work vehicle struggles to hit 150miles on a tank (large, old, automatic and petrol) 

 

That's less than many electric cars. 

 

Am I worried?

 

No. 

 

Because I know that even if I have 30 miles left I could find a filling station, I am very unlikely to have to wait more than 5 minutes for a filling slot and it won't take me more than 5 minutes to fill up. I also know that the difference between the cheapest and most expensive fuel is no more than about 10%. I can predict pretty accurately what my cost will be. 

 

I have a relatively short range but no anxiety about refueling.

 

Electric cars don't need super long ranges. 200miles is probably enough. 

 

They do need a fairly dense network of high speed chargers with a simple and consistent prices. 

 

Ironically the shorter ranges (200mikes or less) imply smaller batteries (50kwh or so). In turn this means faster recharge times (as well as lower build costs, lighter weight etc) 

[SteamyTea]

52 minutes ago, Beelbeebub said:

Air to air would be a much better (and cheaper) route

Never had any incentives attached to it, but planned conditions, until recently, meant you needed permission.

[JohnMo]

 

1 hour ago, Beelbeebub said:

current 4.2 times

It's not really, it a little bit variable based on kWh used per year, as you also have to account for standing charge, which is eliminated with a move away from gas. The less gas you use the bigger the standing charges have on the real cost of gas.

 

So if you use 10000kWh doing heating and hot water, with standing charge is around £810. Converting to HP you only need a CoP of 3.4.to break even.

 

If you are near passive heat loss the gas consumption could be around 5000kWh or lower. So gas £460. So CoP needed is just under 3. The lower your consumption the lower the cop you need to break even.

 

I had a hybrid system set up last year and frankly, when you do the maths, the running cost was bonkers high - hence gas had to go.

 

Edited 5 hours ago by JohnMo

[sharpener]

5 minutes ago, Beelbeebub said:

I have a relatively short range but no anxiety about refueling.

 

Electric cars don't need super long ranges. 200miles is probably enough. 

 

Yes, my first 4-wheeled vehicle was a s/h Viva van, the tank only held 7 gals which was good for just 200 miles.

 

Which going to the Fringe meant one stop between London and Edinburgh and I knew where all the Jet stations were. 

 

And as you say a petrol fill-up only takes 5 mins.

 

ln contrast the EV takes at least 10 for a useful addition to the range and the best part of an hour from empty to full. I have had my fair share of charging points being ICEd in, and having to detour via 3 charging stations late at night before I found one that would accept normal c/cards. That's certainly anxiety-inducing. So it's very handy to be able to get from Cambridge to Romsey and back on one charge.

[JamesPa]

1 hour ago, Dillsue said:

3 hours ago, JamesPa said:

Expand  

So long as installers do a reasonable job of heat loss calcs and emmitter sizing

Unfortunately the evidence is that a significant proportion don't, instead many slavishly follow the MCS rules which are highly likely to overestimate, but give ironclad protection to the installer.  My house may be an extreme example, two surveys each taking 3 Hrs said 16kW whereas it's actually 7kW.

 

Fortunately the better guys understand that the MCS calculations strictly applied may give seriously wrong results, and exercise due judgement, whilst foregoing the ironclad protection that following the mcs rules offers (to installers not customers!).

Edited 4 hours ago by JamesPa