Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
16 minutes ago, Beelbeebub said:

was wondering if installing A2A alongside the existing gas heating and DHW is a good step to moving off gas. 

Basically what @JohnMo did, but with an A2WHP.

 

Posted
33 minutes ago, -rick- said:

Personally, I'm not a fan of air based heating (or cooling) systems. I've never experienced one where I'm not disturbed by the noise when sleeping and I can see that pushing a lot of people to maybe install a system, use it partially but also keep relying on the quiet, hydronic, system much more than any government funded scheme would like. But I think it's worth trying, Americans tend to have air based systems and they don't generally see them as an issue.

I installed A2A last year and I'm very happy with it. The main unit sits under the floor with 200mm insulated ducting running to the larger rooms, and 150mm to bedrooms. The outlets are at floor level (plinth in the kitchen, just above skirting elsewhere). It's inaudible unless you put your ear right up to it.

The MVHR I fitted makes more noise.

Posted
6 hours ago, -rick- said:

The gas was being burnt as a lot of renewables don't have grid forming/peaker capability. This is apparently being fixed by changing inverter programming and the deployment of more batteries (to replace a lot of peaker use).

 

Don't know why this is still a problem. When I worked in the wind turbine business 20 yrs ago it was already being introduced into the German Grid Code. I think there is a lot of good old mechanical inertia in a 10MW wind turbine.

 

  

1 hour ago, Beelbeebub said:

There are some HP systems that are entirely self contained and just require a pair of 150mm inlet/outlet ducts.

 

Yes but not practical for a whole-house system, we looked at this and the duct cross section was ?5x larger than just for MVHR so not practical if you want it to be virtually inaudible.

 

Posted
13 minutes ago, Dillsue said:

 

Interesting document. Firstly, want to make clear that my comments earlier are in relation to summer generation offsetting any additional cooling load caused by this policy change. I've not been thinking about winter generation at all though not sure that makes much difference for our conversation.

 

Secondly, the document shows significant reductions up to 2030, which again aligns with my comments. Beyond that I'm surprised by their predictions but also note that they are basing their graphs on agreed plans. It's inevitable that more distant renewable projects haven't yet been approved as most renewable projects are relatively quick to implement. Nuclear being the only real long term projects that might show up for 2040 predictions at this time.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...