The Lemon Fool

If storage batteries were cheaper then it would make sense to charge them on the economy 7 night rate and use that energy to run the house during the day.

If batteries were that cheap the power companies would take advantage of the arbitrage opportunity and do it themselves, benefiting from economies of scale. Only if you had the battery for other reasons, say in your car, could you make back a fraction of its price with timeshifting in your household.

Just watched a very interesting interview between Skill Builder and a Bosch Design Engineer. Sorry that I do not have a better link. They do not think the supply could keep up with the demand on electricity.
Bosch and other boiler manufacturers working with the government have developed conversion kits to change boilers to Hydrogen. They also think by about 2026 all boilers will have to have the duel capacity Natural Gas and Hydrogen. For a while the gas may be a mixture of both until Hydrogen production could handle the full load. They said this was the only logical way to use the existing pipe grid. This makes a lot of sense.

The only problem will be the cost

They discussed Air Pumps. Thought in new houses they could be ok. The science looks good but in many ways not practical. Spoke about a test in Newcastle where they were offered free units with free installation. 4000 applied, but when all the ins and outs were explained they ended up only fitting 13 units. They cannot compete with a combi boiler in relation to space and piping. Many houses have been fitted with 10mm piping and it seems that this is not suitable for Air Sourced Heat Pumps.

So this would appear to get all the gas future problems resolved.

Watched another video by Plumberparts talking about fitting electric heating elements int existing radiators, for stand alone or duel fuel, with their own control units. I have a towel rail not connected to anything, so this might be the answer.

The problem with Green Hydrogen is after the losses in electrolysis and burning the efficiency is only 46%, compared with 300% for a heat pump. You can put up to 25% hydrogen into a natural gas supply, tweaking the burners. After that you need a new boiler.

If people don't like the sound of ASHPs, they might as well use the electricity to feed storage radiators, than 46% burned as hydrogen.

http://www.csrf.ac.uk/2020/09/hydrogen-for-heating/ Fig 1 shows where 100kW of renewable energy goes

I am suspicious of a boiler company not explaining this

dspp wrote:

88V8 wrote:The electric grid cannot support a move to all-electric, let alone that and EVs.

That's an interesting assertion, which I guess you mean in the context of the UK grid. Do you have any proper engineering calcs to support it, that is ones based on an understanding of the grid ?

No, and one debates such points with you at one's peril

But the more we rely on renewables without storage, the less robust the supply.

V8

long term , the planet is swimming in energy .

it needs capturing , storing and and transporting.

not beyond us .

jackdaww wrote:long term , the planet is swimming in energy .

it needs capturing , storing and and transporting.

not beyond us .

And the most stable, reliable and predictable is tidal power. Seems mad to me we are not exploiting it like mad. Was it Mr Cameron who cancelled it?

Mike4 wrote:

jackdaww wrote:long term , the planet is swimming in energy .

it needs capturing , storing and and transporting.

not beyond us .

And the most stable, reliable and predictable is tidal power. Seems mad to me we are not exploiting it like mad. Was it Mr Cameron who cancelled it?

Tidal power is alive and well - I have friends working on it in Northern Ireland, Pentland Firth, Orkney and various other parts of the world.
The systems they work on involve placing turbines on the seabed and are an extension of the Seagen project in Strangford Lough Northern Ireland
https://simecatlantis.com/projects/meygen/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SeaGen

The project that was cancelled was the incredibly expensive Severn and Cardiff bay Tidal Systems. Given the amount of energy required to build the things and the amount of silt carried by the Severn River which would have blocked the proposed turbines in a few years I was extremely happy that someone in government saw sense and killed the project.

PhaseThree wrote:

Mike4 wrote:

jackdaww wrote:long term , the planet is swimming in energy .

it needs capturing , storing and and transporting.

not beyond us .

And the most stable, reliable and predictable is tidal power. Seems mad to me we are not exploiting it like mad. Was it Mr Cameron who cancelled it?

Tidal power is alive and well - I have friends working on it in Northern Ireland, Pentland Firth, Orkney and various other parts of the world.
The systems they work on involve placing turbines on the seabed and are an extension of the Seagen project in Strangford Lough Northern Ireland
https://simecatlantis.com/projects/meygen/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SeaGen

The project that was cancelled was the incredibly expensive Severn and Cardiff bay Tidal Systems. Given the amount of energy required to build the things and the amount of silt carried by the Severn River which would have blocked the proposed turbines in a few years I was extremely happy that someone in government saw sense and killed the project.

Oh I was thinking of the Swansea Bay Tidal Lagoon project.

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

Mike4 wrote:Oh I was thinking of the Swansea Bay Tidal Lagoon project.

Projects like this that would have a significant effect on our dwindling wildlife deserve to be killed off.
The world was not made just for us.

V8

88V8 wrote:

Mike4 wrote:Oh I was thinking of the Swansea Bay Tidal Lagoon project.

Projects like this that would have a significant effect on our dwindling wildlife deserve to be killed off.
The world was not made just for us.

V8

I find it very curious that the dwindling wildlife we have should be concentrated in Swansea Bay.

Forgive my cynicism but the I notice the same argument is always marshalled against ANY infrastructure project, so I suspect there were other reasons for its cancellation and wildlife was used as a woke excuse.

There only has to be an endangered species in the area which would be adversely affected for the development to be halted or stopped.

Mike4 wrote:I find it very curious that the dwindling wildlife we have should be concentrated in Swansea Bay.
Forgive my cynicism but the I notice the same argument is always marshalled against ANY infrastructure project, so I suspect there were other reasons for its cancellation and wildlife was used as a woke excuse.

It's a significant feeding and nesting area for birds.

If wildlife and nature were given their due, HS2 should not be happening either.

Woke? Me? Hahaha.
No, I'm a tree hugger.

V8

How viable (and costly) is it though, to move from a currently cheaper gas central heating & hot water system, using a combi-boiler and radiators, to an all electric system? And particularly if one lives in a mid-floor flat and so has no options to use solar panels or windmills. The Government's scheme doesn't seem to consider those situations.

richfool wrote:How viable (and costly) is it though, to move from a currently cheaper gas central heating & hot water system, using a combi-boiler and radiators, to an all electric system? And particularly if one lives in a mid-floor flat and so has no options to use solar panels or windmills. The Government's scheme doesn't seem to consider those situations.

Most flats are electric already. Bt for those with gas heating, switching to an electric combi is cheap and easy. The problem if any, is the reduction in hot water performance of electric combis performance combined with nose-bleed day-to-day running costs.

What government scheme is this then you mention? For converting heating to electric?

@88V8 supports the environment, but don't seem to have a plan for making our power supply environmentally sustainable.

Mike4 wrote:

richfool wrote:How viable (and costly) is it though, to move from a currently cheaper gas central heating & hot water system, using a combi-boiler and radiators, to an all electric system? And particularly if one lives in a mid-floor flat and so has no options to use solar panels or windmills. The Government's scheme doesn't seem to consider those situations.

Most flats are electric already. Bt for those with gas heating, switching to an electric combi is cheap and easy. The problem if any, is the reduction in hot water performance of electric combis performance combined with nose-bleed day-to-day running costs.

What government scheme is this then you mention? For converting heating to electric?

But as I see it, rightly or wrongly, currently gas is cheaper than electricity. I can't access cheap electricity by having solar panels. Our radiator system is already installed. So I don't have to pay for installing electric radiators or an electric water heater, nor a hot water tank if using an Economy 7 type tariff. As I understand it, the more recently mentioned heat pump systems (Government initiative) wouldn't work without access to the ground; and the freeholder or indeed us flat owners wouldn't be too keen on any monstrosities sticking through the walls and maybe whirring all night long(?).

The Severn/Bristol channel Tidal barrage schemes are entirely unnecessary and are as much about politicians being seen to be green as they are about sustainable power.
If you take a look at the links I attached above you will see what is currently "state of the art" in tidal generation. The generator is effectively an underwater windmill attached to a sled which is sunk to the seabed then wired up either to the shore or connected to the other generators. Maintenance is performed by lifting the whole sled+generator using a lifting ship. When deployed there is nothing to see as the blade tips are well below low tide level. As a power generation solution this is relatively low cost but doesn't shout "We're doing something".

The barrage system in contrast involve embedding turbines in vast amount of concrete at enormous expense. The cost of electricity generated by the Swansea scheme was estimated at 1.5 times that of the Hinckley-C nuclear development, which itself doesn't offer good value to the taxpayer.

The Swansea scheme was to cost £1.3 billion and generate sufficient energy for 120000 homes at 2018 prices. So the cost would be roughly £10K per home assuming that the original price estimate was correct,.

richfool wrote:

Mike4 wrote:

richfool wrote:How viable (and costly) is it though, to move from a currently cheaper gas central heating & hot water system, using a combi-boiler and radiators, to an all electric system? And particularly if one lives in a mid-floor flat and so has no options to use solar panels or windmills. The Government's scheme doesn't seem to consider those situations.

Most flats are electric already. Bt for those with gas heating, switching to an electric combi is cheap and easy. The problem if any, is the reduction in hot water performance of electric combis performance combined with nose-bleed day-to-day running costs.

What government scheme is this then you mention? For converting heating to electric?

But as I see it, rightly or wrongly, currently gas is cheaper than electricity. I can't access cheap electricity by having solar panels. Our radiator system is already installed. So I don't have to pay for installing electric radiators or an electric water heater, nor a hot water tank if using an Economy 7 type tariff. As I understand it, the more recently mentioned heat pump systems (Government initiative) wouldn't work without access to the ground; and the freeholder or indeed us flat owners wouldn't be too keen on any monstrosities sticking through the walls and maybe whirring all night long(?).

Yes but what government initiative is this you mention?

All I can think of is their kite flying in the media telling us gas will be banned in new homes at some point in the future. Hardly a "government scheme" or "heat pump initiative".

PhaseThree wrote:The Severn/Bristol channel Tidal barrage schemes are entirely unnecessary and are as much about politicians being seen to be green as they are about sustainable power.
If you take a look at the links I attached above you will see what is currently "state of the art" in tidal generation. The generator is effectively an underwater windmill attached to a sled which is sunk to the seabed then wired up either to the shore or connected to the other generators. Maintenance is performed by lifting the whole sled+generator using a lifting ship. When deployed there is nothing to see as the blade tips are well below low tide level. As a power generation solution this is relatively low cost but doesn't shout "We're doing something".

The barrage system in contrast involve embedding turbines in vast amount of concrete at enormous expense. The cost of electricity generated by the Swansea scheme was estimated at 1.5 times that of the Hinckley-C nuclear development, which itself doesn't offer good value to the taxpayer.

The Swansea scheme was to cost £1.3 billion and generate sufficient energy for 120000 homes at 2018 prices. So the cost would be roughly £10K per home assuming that the original price estimate was correct,.

It might equate to £10K per home but presumably that's virtually free energy for 120,000 homes for the life of the installation.....say 30 years. That's a cost of £6 per week per property + maintenance costs. Seems like a bargain many of us would like to accept.