Energy Prices (Strictly NO referrals!)

[jam pie]

I’m sorry, but no. We should be doing both. Reducing demand through sensible choices (like wearing a jumper) and improving insulation, and increasing our own generation abilities. The current situation is not sustainable.

That's a given if you can't afford it, but to suggest that's an acceptable position by saying thing like.... "would argue those days never should have been a thing" and "walking around in a t shirt has gone" are regressive thinking long term.

We have a multitude of ways to generate electricity, it's just we've failed to make that happen sustainably, for whatever reason.

Reducing usage is something that should happen for a very short period whilst we fix supply, otherwise we might as well go back to the stone age. Long term our electricity usage should go up massively as we figure out how to stop energy corps and government short termism crippling everything.

 

[Mysterae_]

I'm with @jam pie on this.

In a civilised and technology aware society where we have achieved so much you'd think that we would have evolved and matured enough to never see another person cold or starving. There should never have to be the decision for either one. It's 2023, not 1923.
There's plenty of energy in the world and food is in an abundance never known before. Yet here we are because of the greed of the few and the newly determined means of control of the masses to ensure that we don't get out of station or too big for our breeches.

 

[Uther]

Well at least more people have got double glazing now, I still remember ice on the inside of my bedroom window when I was young.
It's not a time we should be looking to go back to IMO.

 

[drakulton]

I got given an Oodie for Christmas, I've spent most of my week living in it

I thought those guys in doctor who were a bit creepy.

 

[bigmike20vt]

Disagree with the above two posts, it's prehistoric thinking. We should all be increasing our energy demands and innovation should see us through, just a shame we've had constant systematic failure by governments and energy corps.

energy is a finite resource , even if we were full nuclear that is still no reason to waste it.... ... and if we go full renewable which I would love to happen one day, actual intelligent energy use will be even more important.
why is wearing suitable clothes prehistoric thinking?
your comment reminds me of my old house mate. she used to wear skimpy little tops and wack the heating up full..... and open her window when she got hot...... didn't bother her as her rent included bills.... DID bother me as I was the landlord!

and suggesting wearing a jumper is going back to the stone age.... Christ, no wonder we are where we are with that attitude.
our throw away society attitude (and I am far from perfect as well) stinks. we should be striving to improve not go worse.

 

[Puzzled]

Wearing shorts and t-shirt in winter might be pushing it but it does seem crazy in this world of modern tech that heating a home to a comfortable temperature is too expensive for many.

We need the equivalent of the LED breakthrough in lighting for heating. We reduced a 100w lightbulb to 10/15w, need to do the same with electric heating.

 

[b0rn2sk8]

Wearing shorts and t-shirt in winter might be pushing it but it does seem crazy in this world of modern tech that heating a home to a comfortable temperature is too expensive for many.

We need the equivalent of the LED breakthrough in lighting for heating. We reduced a 100w lightbulb to 10/15w, need to do the same with electric heating.

The only reason lights have seen such a dramatic energy reduction is that most of the energy used was lost as heat. Electric to heat conversion is already 99.9999% efficient. Short of breaking physics, the best we can do is a heat pump because they don't generate heat, they just move it from one place to another. They cut the energy needed by at least 1/3 but costs £10k+ to retrofit into an existing house and probably isn't going to get any cheaper. It's old tech and has been around for decades (fridges, air con etc. are all heat pumps).

That said if houses were actually built properly, they'd hardly need any heat in the UK, to the point that it wouldn't make sense to use heat pumps and straight electric radiators/UFH would make more sense.

 

[bigmike20vt]

We need the equivalent of the LED breakthrough in lighting for heating. We reduced a 100w lightbulb to 10/15w, need to do the same with electric heating.

that is kind of what heat pumps try to do.

I may be about to look an idiot. if so I apologies. I am a geneticist not a physicist.

But ..,... The problem is 100w bulbs were terribly inefficient. the energy we wanted was light however we got maybe 5w of light energy from the bulb and the rest was heat.

there was a. huge area for improvement there.

I don't know the exact effiency of an led bulb and can't be bothered googling as am about to go to bed... but an LED bulb of 7w may given off the same 5w of light energy only wasting 2w as heat.

but with a heater........... given that energy can not be destroyed only converted from 1 form to another......creating heat energy is actually much easier to be more efficient.

sure there are losses with electricity generation but they already happen before it gets to us.... once that electricity goes into a heater, most of that energy does get converted to heat. there is far less room for making effiency gains.

an old fashioned backboiler may be considered to be inefficient but that is only because a lot of the heat goes up the chimney. a decent combi boiler does a far better job of making sure as much heat energy as possible is sent to the right places and an electric panel heater..... what energy waste is there? there are no mechanical moving parts, they don't make a noise and they don't emit light. in my totally unexpert opinion almost all that electricity goes right into creating heat.

edit. I was ninja'd whilst writing this post

 

[One More Solo]

I'm with @jam pie on this.

In a civilised and technology aware society where we have achieved so much you'd think that we would have evolved and matured enough to never see another person cold or starving. There should never have to be the decision for either one. It's 2023, not 1923.
There's plenty of energy in the world and food is in an abundance never known before. Yet here we are because of the greed of the few and the newly determined means of control of the masses to ensure that we don't get out of station or too big for our breeches.

No one is suggesting people should be cold or starving. I find it abhorrent that people in the U.K. are struggling to stay warm or eat. Rather, I’m saying there are small elements of peoples’ lifestyles that are not sustainable without massive changes in technology.

 

[Mysterae_]

No one is suggesting people should be cold or starving. I find it abhorrent that people in the U.K. are struggling to stay warm or eat. Rather, I’m saying there are small elements of peoples’ lifestyles that are not sustainable without massive changes in technology.

I won't argue with you there.

 

[bigmike20vt]

No one is suggesting people should be cold or starving. I find it abhorrent that people in the U.K. are struggling to stay warm or eat. Rather, I’m saying there are small elements of peoples’ lifestyles that are not sustainable without massive changes in technology.

indeed and comparing people criticising those not being sensible with energy usage to being ok with people freezing and starving is a massive strawman and shows a huge dishonesty.

I would say running your house at a really high temp whilst moaning about putting on sensible clothes in an energy crisis is a perfect example of the greed of the few.

and just to reiterate, whilst I try to a point, I am far from perfect as well. I doubt Greta would have me on her Xmas card list

 

[chrcoluk]

At last, DM apparently have an article today lambasting unfairness of standing charge(vat, bulb+other pay-off, consumption component) for poorer folks, and OFGEN ineffectiveness - that means you too, bystander Martin

govt update on upcoming business rates wasn't deivered by today/new year , so expect the writing is on the wall for businesses like local chippy, high energy small businesses.

If EDF are planning to now switch off 2 of their older reactors/2024 due to windfall tax on legacy(non cfd) generators ominous for UK, off-peak surpluses.

Even if its DM only, any coverage is good on the issue.

The 2 billion unprotected surplus has gained coverage as well.

This the article?

Rapidly rising 'stealth tax' on bills used to bailout energy firms

Campaigners have condemned the increases to the levy, which has soared over the past 12 months - and now costs bill-payers around £273 each.

www.dailymail.co.uk

It is feared the £6.5 billion cost of Bulb’s implosion – the most costly taxpayer rescue since the financial crisis – could result in standing charges surging further.

Citizens Advice has now written to Business Secretary Grant Shapps seeking assurances that Bulb’s costs will not be recovered through the standing charge.

Hope they succeed, it will be ridiculous if thats lumped on it.

 

[aardvark]

We need the equivalent of the LED breakthrough in lighting for heating. We reduced a 100w lightbulb to 10/15w, need to do the same with electric heating.

yeah thats not how physics works - electric heating can't get more efficient

 

[delta0]

yeah thats not how physics works - electric heating can't get more efficient

Depends. If you look at converting electricity to heat then yes an electric heater is pretty much 100% efficient. A heat pump however will usually increase that heat output more relative to the electricity required. They typically use 50% less electricity to generate the same amount of heat.

 

[robgmun]

The only reason lights have seen such a dramatic energy reduction is that most of the energy used was lost as heat. Electric to heat conversion is already 99.9999% efficient. Short of breaking physics, the best we can do is a heat pump because they don't generate heat, they just move it from one place to another. They cut the energy needed by at least 1/3 but costs £10k+ to retrofit into an existing house and probably isn't going to get any cheaper. It's old tech and has been around for decades (fridges, air con etc. are all heat pumps).

That said if houses were actually built properly, they'd hardly need any heat in the UK, to the point that it wouldn't make sense to use heat pumps and straight electric radiators/UFH would make more sense.

I remain highly highly skeptical of heat pumps because if for example like this winter it's -5C outside, there's not enough heat outside to transfer to the inside of the house. Indeed I've read several writeups of people who have heat pumps who said they're basically useless when you need it the most.

 

[Curlyriff]

I remain highly highly skeptical of heat pumps because if for example like this winter it's -5C outside, there's not enough heat outside to transfer to the inside of the house. Indeed I've read several writeups of people who have heat pumps who said they're basically useless when you need it the most.

Air source heat pumps yes. Ground source heatpumps nope. They maintain their ability year round cause the depth they go the temps are static that low. This is why the govs half measure of forcing air source heat pumps is rubbish and should have gone ground source for all new builds. The cost difference per unit isn't huge on a new build either.

 

[Mysterae_]

Air source heat pumps yes. Ground source heatpumps nope. They maintain their ability year round cause the depth they go the temps are static that low. This is why the govs half measure of forcing air source heat pumps is rubbish and should have gone ground source for all new builds. The cost difference per unit isn't huge on a new build either.

There is a risk with GSHP that if the store of heat that is consumed during the winter isn't replenished by the sun in the summer (poor summer, tree cover, poor design) then it can effectively create a permafrost metres down in the land, which of course means less energy year on year, if anything. According to the expert I spoke to when I was considering GSHP it can happen in as little as 5 years. They wouldn't guarantee against it either for obvious reasons. There are countermeasures available to limit it but it just adds to an already expensive alternative.

 

[jpaul]

We need the equivalent of the LED breakthrough in lighting for heating. We reduced a 100w lightbulb to 10/15w, need to do the same with electric heating

in terms of producing the heat so it more efficiently heats -you- IR heaters are where it's at V I'd like to try one for WFH

I'd like to find out more about IR heater panels .. mentioned on radio the other day
they seem to be efficient and potentially portable ... but, payback period not negligible (like pv/insulation ...) £150+

eg. https://www.vasner.com/shop/en 5year warranty

• Nominal heat output (Pnom): 300 watts: 0,3 kW | 450 watts: 0,45 kW | 550 watts: 0,55 kW | 700 watts: 0,7 kW | 900 watts: 0,9 kW | 1100 watts: 1,1 kW
• Maximum continuous heat output (Pmax,c): 300 watts: 0,3 kW | 450 watts: 0,45 kW | 550 watts: 0,55 kW | 700 watts: 0,7 kW | 900 watts: 0,9 kW | 1100 watts: 1,1 kW
• Auxiliary power consumption at nominal heat output: 300 watt model: 0,314 kW | 450 watt model: 0,476 kW | 550 watt model: 0,572 kW | 700 watt model: 0,728 kW | 900 watt model: 0,935 kW | 1100 watt model: 1,184 kW

 

[b0rn2sk8]

I remain highly highly skeptical of heat pumps because if for example like this winter it's -5C outside, there's not enough heat outside to transfer to the inside of the house. Indeed I've read several writeups of people who have heat pumps who said they're basically useless when you need it the most.

There is plenty of heat available at -5C, heat pumps are deployed in far colder countries than the UK. The issue is UK housing being old and generally **** when it comes to heat loss (and gain in the summer).

There is a risk with GSHP that if the store of heat that is consumed during the winter isn't replenished by the sun in the summer (poor summer, tree cover, poor design) then it can effectively create a permafrost metres down in the land, which of course means less energy year on year, if anything. According to the expert I spoke to when I was considering GSHP it can happen in as little as 5 years. They wouldn't guarantee against it either for obvious reasons. There are countermeasures available to limit it but it just adds to an already expensive alternative.

The gold standard for a GSHP is to use a bore hole so that isn't an issue. The heat is coming from the earths core, its more more stable and the risk of a badly designed system freezing the ground isn't there.

Unlike with a gas boiler with heat pumps, the margin for error is tiny, if the system is badly designed it will not work. A badly designed gas system can be overcome with just whacking on the biggest boiler that will fit which is the standard approach. You get poor efficiency but it works and that is usually all the customer cares about.

in terms of producing the heat so it more efficiently heats -you- IR heaters are where it's at V I'd like to try one for WFH

They only work with direct line of sight so completely ineffective in a lot of scenarios. As soon as you switch them off, you'll be cold again as its not radiant heat like you get from a traditional system. They have their uses, such as heating a single office room during the day but please don't kid yourself its some kind of replacement for your whole house. They are also ugly as sin and huge if you are trying to cover a room.

 

[bigmike20vt]

in terms of producing the heat so it more efficiently heats -you- IR heaters are where it's at V I'd like to try one for WFH

fully charged has covered them a few times (YouTube channel). they do look interesting and also you dont have to have a costly install either you can just buy one like you can an electric heater if you want.