📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

Green, ethical, energy issues in the news

Options
1341342344346347847

Comments

  • 1961Nick
    1961Nick Posts: 2,107 Forumite
    Tenth Anniversary 1,000 Posts Name Dropper
    EricMears wrote: »
    Neither ! It's a simple economic fact that 'new adopters' pay more. I refer you to my supplementary point about colour TVs.
    I’m happy to have played a part in subsidising Mart’s battery ... when he eventually gets one.:)
    4kWp (black/black) - Sofar Inverter - SSE(141°) - 30° pitch - North Lincs
    Installed June 2013 - PVGIS = 3400
    Sofar ME3000SP Inverter & 5 x Pylontech US2000B Plus & 3 x US2000C Batteries - 19.2kWh
  • GreatApe
    GreatApe Posts: 4,452 Forumite
    Possibly because a lot of us can't afford new cars of any sort.


    The rich 'sub' transport for the less rich
    A car typically has 4 owners in its life
    Let's say for arguments sake a £20k new car
    The first owner especially takes a big hit
    And There are good/okay cars at every price point

    Now with regards to EVs Because they are so much more expensive it's likely to be different
    For instance someone might be buying with the view to hold more years or even to end of life
    The result will be the second hand market is more expensive than it is today and much smaller

    Take the extreme what happens if the rich who buy new keep their EVs until end of life?
    What do the middle and poor do?
    Of course that won't happen but it's somewhat between that and what we have now
  • 1961Nick
    1961Nick Posts: 2,107 Forumite
    Tenth Anniversary 1,000 Posts Name Dropper
    JKenH wrote: »
    You don’t need to make excuses for Mart - it was a rhetorical question. The bottom line all of us are on here is because it’s a Money Saving forum - lots of moralising goes on about saving the planet but the truth is we all think with our wallets. Is there honestly one person on here who bought solar panels to save the planet not because it made financial sense?

    When someone does something truly altruistic then I will be the first to applaud them but until then let’s please drop the self righteous hypocrisy and posturing.
    Maybe not with solar panels, but I was aware that batteries would reduce overall consumption - gone is the ‘use it or lose it’ mindset - even if the financials weren’t that sound. Some of the rationale was that I’d never used any of the FIT I’d received & batteries seemed like a ethical place to invest that money. It also appealed to the inner geek!
    4kWp (black/black) - Sofar Inverter - SSE(141°) - 30° pitch - North Lincs
    Installed June 2013 - PVGIS = 3400
    Sofar ME3000SP Inverter & 5 x Pylontech US2000B Plus & 3 x US2000C Batteries - 19.2kWh
  • 1961Nick
    1961Nick Posts: 2,107 Forumite
    Tenth Anniversary 1,000 Posts Name Dropper
    GreatApe wrote: »
    The rich 'sub' transport for the less rich
    A car typically has 4 owners in its life
    Let's say for arguments sake a £20k new car
    The first owner especially takes a big hit
    And There are good/okay cars at every price point

    Now with regards to EVs Because they are so much more expensive it's likely to be different
    For instance someone might be buying with the view to hold more years or even to end of life
    The result will be the second hand market is more expensive than it is today and much smaller

    Take the extreme what happens if the rich who buy new keep their EVs until end of life?
    What do the middle and poor do?
    Of course that won't happen but it's somewhat between that and what we have now
    It’ll take 4 - 5 years before there’s a reasonable supply of ex-company BEVs available for the private buyer. Improvements in BEV technology will mean that businesses continue to replace vehicles on a 3 year cycle for a little while. Also, contract hire is typically tailored to 2, 3 or 4 years. Legally there is no option to purchase so the vehicle goes to auction.
    4kWp (black/black) - Sofar Inverter - SSE(141°) - 30° pitch - North Lincs
    Installed June 2013 - PVGIS = 3400
    Sofar ME3000SP Inverter & 5 x Pylontech US2000B Plus & 3 x US2000C Batteries - 19.2kWh
  • mmmmikey
    mmmmikey Posts: 2,349 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Homepage Hero Name Dropper
    edited 23 September 2019 at 11:35PM
    JKenH wrote: »
    You don’t need to make excuses for Mart - it was a rhetorical question. The bottom line all of us are on here is because it’s a Money Saving forum - lots of moralising goes on about saving the planet but the truth is we all think with our wallets. Is there honestly one person on here who bought solar panels to save the planet not because it made financial sense?

    When someone does something truly altruistic then I will be the first to applaud them but until then let’s please drop the self righteous hypocrisy and posturing.

    No, that is your view and not the truth for all of us.

    I bought a battery system knowing at best I had a fighting chance of seing my money back but because I saw it as a low cost (in the long term) way of reducing my carbon footprint.

    Similarly I'm installing a rainwater harvetsing system with marginal payback economics because I hate the idea of the waste associated with flushing treated water down the loo.

    I use my pedelec in order to reduce the amount of diesel I use but the reality is that it is well within my means to buy the diesel.

    I've started to spend more money on ethical cleaning and household products, and reduce my consumption of red meat.

    As soon as an EV becomes a viable option for me I will buy one even knowing that it will almost certainly increase my travel costs.

    Is there more I can do - yes for sure, and I will continue to get on with generally doing my bit.

    Most of the things I've done have been by following the lead of many others who post on these forums, and many of them have cost me money rather than saved me money.

    Your idea of green and ethical moneysaving might be based around using green initiatives to reduce the household budget. You're not alone in that and I wouldn't criticise you for it. But please don't make the mistake of thinking that your views about the environment apply to all of us.

    For some of us the money saving bit is about reducing our environmental impact cost effectively and within our own means, not exploiting green technologies to reduce the household budget. I know I'm not alone in accepting that there is a cost associated with protecting the environment and I for one am happy to pay that cost, I just want to do it as cost effectively as possible which is where the money saving bit comes in.

    I can honestly say that I was deeply moved by Greta's emotional speech at the UN earlier today and that it bought a tear to my eye. There's no way that a 16 year old child could have delivered that speech in that way without believing in it, and I'm sure she represents the views of a huge number of children of her age. For my part, I will carry on doing what I'm doing for her and her generation. You make think it is pious, but I truly believe we all have a moral duty to listen to her and act. I know from many, many posts on this forum I am not alone in this.

    Your denial of the overwhelming scientific evidence is really hard to fathom. I can understand why the likes of Donald Trump would deny climate issues because of vested political interests or similarly why oil companies would deny the issues because of vested interests. But I completely fail to understand how an intelligent and literate person can live in such ignorance.
  • JKenH
    JKenH Posts: 5,139 Forumite
    Seventh Anniversary 1,000 Posts Name Dropper
    edited 24 September 2019 at 7:49AM
    1961Nick wrote: »
    Maybe not with solar panels, but I was aware that batteries would reduce overall consumption - gone is the ‘use it or lose it’ mindset - even if the financials weren’t that sound. Some of the rationale was that I’d never used any of the FIT I’d received & batteries seemed like a ethical place to invest that money. It also appealed to the inner geek!

    Whoa, steady there Nick, you are in danger of becoming one of the good guys. That will really confuse Mart. I suspect, though, it was the geek in you that swayed the battery decision. Actually for me the geekiness of solar panels appealed.

    I am quite keen on buying an EV which for me will never work out financially compared to my zero tax, 60mpg plus Euro 6 Golf. I can’t explain it, I just want one. Maybe it’s Mart posting subliminal messages.
    Northern Lincolnshire. 7.8 kWp system, (4.2 kw west facing panels , 3.6 kw east facing), Solis inverters, Solar IBoost water heater, Mitsubishi SRK35ZS-S and SRK20ZS-S Wall Mounted Inverter Heat Pumps, ex Nissan Leaf owner)
  • Martyn1981
    Martyn1981 Posts: 15,400 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    edited 24 September 2019 at 7:36AM
    JKenH wrote: »
    Just remind me please, Mart, why you have held off buying a battery or BEV. Nothing to do with waiting for them to get a bit cheaper, was it?

    Why are you so obsessed with me, and what I do?

    I've pointed out (3 years ago) that I'm concerned about the environmental impact of a battery in my case, switching 900kWh of demand from import to stored PV would result in approx 200kWh's of gas being burnt for the NG.

    I don't like arguing about this as it can be used (by folk like you) to give the impression I'm against batts, or the early adopters, I'm not.

    For RE to reach very high penetrations (80/90%+) we will of course need storage, and that would normally mean my full support at this point in time, however we are very lucky that the storage market is being pushed along at a staggering rate already by the automotive industry, so the tech/cost issues are already being solved from that side, and whilst I would like to see some government support for batteries, I'm content with their progress, and have no worries that they will be capable and economic when we need them.

    Regarding a BEV, Wifey and I with limited budget and variable transport needs can't currently justify a BEV, or a second car, however as I've been discussing elsewhere, I may have found a way to do it.


    Your obsession with trying to undermine RE, AGW etc by constantly attacking me on green grounds, is somewhat sad. If you want to claim you are the greenest person on MSE, then go ahead, it worries me not a jot.
    Mart. Cardiff. 8.72 kWp PV systems (2.12 SSW 4.6 ESE & 2.0 WNW). 20kWh battery storage. Two A2A units for cleaner heating. Two BEV's for cleaner driving.

    For general PV advice please see the PV FAQ thread on the Green & Ethical Board.
  • Martyn1981
    Martyn1981 Posts: 15,400 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    1961Nick wrote: »
    Hmmm.....I get what you’re saying Mart but I’m also aware that the maximum effect that the UK can have on future CO2 emissions is roughly 1%. That basically means we are in the hands of others when it comes to avoiding the climate catastrophe (assuming there is one of course). I don’t have the same confidence in the rest of the world as you do when it comes ensuring 1.5C isn’t breached by a significant amount. Being an island with a seafaring history, many of our major towns & Cities are ports which are particularly vulnerable to extreme weather & any rise in sea level. It would make a lot of sense to start planning for the worst now and spending money on flood defences as well as reducing GHG emissions. Any planning applications in low lying areas should be made to anticipate a significant rise in sea level. New roads & railways should also built to the same criteria in these areas.

    Cancel Hinckley, subsidise more windmills, build a few more CCGT power stations to handle any shortfall, then spend the balance on some seriously over engineered flood defences.

    The alternative for many of us could be spending 3 months of the year marooned on our own little islands in Lincolnshire ... but we’d be content in the knowledge that we done our moral duty in respect of climate change.

    I still don't buy into your 1% argument.

    You might dismiss the fact that historically we are responsible for 5% of CO2 emissions, but I'd argue that since we benefited greatly from this (The British Empire), we should accept some responsibility.

    But at 1%, you are not excusing UK action, you are confirming it, as we have 1% of the population.


    Yes we are in the hands of all others, but so are all others, so again you confirm the need to act, not to sit idle instead.


    Of course you have less confidence that we can avoid exceeding 1.5C+, because you are arguing against action today. It's a self fulfilling prophecy.


    We are planning today for sea level rises, but the best possible defence we can roll out is to minimise the amount of emissions, to minimise the level of AGW to minimise the level of sea rise.

    Any monies we (the planet) don't spend today, will result in vastly greater spend later on an almost hopeless attempt to defend against higher sea levels and storm surges.


    I'm not sure you understand how significant the impacts of greater warming will be. to go back to mmmmikey's analogy of the life raft, he said you were offering an alternative such as a life vest - that would equate to us debating wind v's solar investment, but what I see is someone saying 'if we expend too much energy trying to fix the life raft then we won't have enough left to evolve gills when it sinks.

    If we see temp rises of 3, 4, 5C, do you honestly believe we can build sea defences high enough to prevent sustained or permanent flooding of all our coastal towns and cities? Wouldn't it be better (and cheaper) to avoid the worst of it instead by acting now?
    Mart. Cardiff. 8.72 kWp PV systems (2.12 SSW 4.6 ESE & 2.0 WNW). 20kWh battery storage. Two A2A units for cleaner heating. Two BEV's for cleaner driving.

    For general PV advice please see the PV FAQ thread on the Green & Ethical Board.
  • Martyn1981
    Martyn1981 Posts: 15,400 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    EricMears wrote: »
    Neither ! It's a simple economic fact that 'new adopters' pay more. I refer you to my supplementary point about colour TVs.

    So you accept that action is needed, but if we all sit back and wait for someone else to do it, then it'll never happen. I think your argument is broken, and the moral side is perhaps questionable too?

    In the case of PV success was achieved thanks to an international deployment of schemes (most called FiTs).

    I've argued this before, and still believe it, that the biggest CO2 savings the UK (and others) got for their investment was not the PV we deployed, but the PV that poorer nations (in Africa, India etc) are deploying because the technology is now affordable and economic. India is a great example as they had announced vast coal build outs to meet growing energy demands, but 'we' cut the off at the pass by making PV affordable, and they switched policies and cancelled plans for a huge amount of that FF rollout and invested in PV (and wind) instead.

    If we'd all sat round waiting, then thanks to CO2 and AGW failing to respect national boundaries, the impacts would be far worse.
    Mart. Cardiff. 8.72 kWp PV systems (2.12 SSW 4.6 ESE & 2.0 WNW). 20kWh battery storage. Two A2A units for cleaner heating. Two BEV's for cleaner driving.

    For general PV advice please see the PV FAQ thread on the Green & Ethical Board.
  • Martyn1981
    Martyn1981 Posts: 15,400 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    This has surprised me, it says that natural gas is actually worse for the environment due to methane emissions, but I thought that was only true for fracking.

    Obviously I'm on the side of reduce all FF's as fast as possible, but had thought we could lean on NG a bit more than this suggests? perhaps a German bias as they struggle to quickly shift from coal and lignite?

    Energy Watch Group Says Natural Gas Is A Death Sentence For The Earth
    If we’ve heard it once, we’ve heard it a thousand times. Natural gas is a bridge fuel to the clean energy future. Not so, says Germany’s Energy Watch Group. “Due to alarming methane emissions, the switch from coal-fired power generation and oil heating to natural gas increases the greenhouse effect of the energy supply by around 40%. As a result, natural gas does not make any contribution to climate protection, contrary to what is widely conveyed to the public, but instead causes an additional acceleration of climate change.”
    Mart. Cardiff. 8.72 kWp PV systems (2.12 SSW 4.6 ESE & 2.0 WNW). 20kWh battery storage. Two A2A units for cleaner heating. Two BEV's for cleaner driving.

    For general PV advice please see the PV FAQ thread on the Green & Ethical Board.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 351.2K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 453.7K Spending & Discounts
  • 244.2K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 599.3K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177K Life & Family
  • 257.6K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.