The Alternative Green Energy Thread

michaels

JKenH said:

I’m with Rishi

We’ve all had a few hours to reflect on the changes and much disappointment has been expressed but largely that is coming from ideologues,sectors who have vested interests and those hoping to make political capital out of the changes. Perhaps, not surprisingly, there was more reaction to the leak of the changes than the announcement itself with various parties hoping it wasn’t too late to get Rishi to change his mind. In fact the BBC (in disbelief that this could actually be happening) suggested that the leak was just the government sounding out the ideal to gauge reaction. Well, good on Rishi, he didn’t flinch.

So what does it all mean in practice?

The ban on ICE vehicles being moved.

This I believe was essential both practically and politically. EVs are coming - they are getting better and cheaper and with bigger batteries (yes, I know that means more CO2 in manufacture and use) will be soon be practical for most of the population. Just because EVs are suitable for 95% of journeys, though, doesn’t make them suitable for 95% of users. There will always be edge cases and forcing a ban only fuels the fire of resistance and legitimises the edge case argument. If there is no ban that % who believe an EV will never work for them have nothing to complain about. What will be the point of the EVs will never work stories in the DM and DT - it’s like complaining that Caterhams are impractical. Fine, if they don’t work for you that’s ok because now you don’t have to buy one. Having a ban take effect in 2030 5 years ahead of Europe alway smacked of the ideologues running the country rather than the pragmatists. In 5 years time EVs will be so common on our roads that they are just another form of propulsion not an impractical invention of the socialist out to rule our lives - we don’t  need a ban, full stop. If EVs are better folk will buy them (new or used). Personally I think the moving of the ban has lifted one of the obstacles to widespread EV adoption - there is no longer a war to be fought; you make the decision on what works best for you and for most people that will be EVs. 

For the industry I can see the objections but should we make people buy cars they don’t want just to suit the manufacturers or should they make cars people want to buy - not the ones they want to sell? (Ford stopped making their best selling car, the Fiesta, because they thought they could force people to buy the more profitable Puma. Tesla are now building cars without indicator stalks - just ask yourself, why that is.)

If you have to pass a law to make someone buy something they don’t want then there is something wrong with the product; that is not a good law and  is never a good political move. Good luck to Labour if they are planning on reversing the shift to 2035. 

The oil boiler ban being moved to align with the gas boiler date

i never understood why new oil boilers were going to be banned in 2026 but new gas boilers could be bought until 2035, so the levelling out there is a good idea. People don’t  have oil boilers because they don’t want mains gas - we have a choice of oil or propane - both more expensive than mains gas. My boiler is 17 years old and going strong. As things were, I was going to be faced with a decision in the next 3 years as to whether to replace it with a new one at £2-3k or keep it until it dies and then get a heat pump - at what cost? Probably for me, with 20 radiators, it would be quite pricey and involve a lot of disruption. I can now defer that decision until heat pump costs come down and efficiency improves. 

Improving rented properties to EPC C standard

A lot of landlords with older houses have already left the market and sold up and others were considering doing so because of the expense of meeting the EPC standard and that has seriously impacted on rents. That’s the law of unintended consequences. I don’t have any rented properties but my son has a number of large student houses (5,6 and 7 bedroom). Anyone familiar with the EPC will know you need a much higher standard of insulation in a large house than a small one as the EPC is based on the cost of heating the property. Because of the floor area I struggled to reach a C for my own house with extra thick wall insulation, 300 m loft insulation, underfloor insulation and modern double glazed windows. The EPC system is not fit for purpose and demanding a C rating in large Victorian houses was an unnecessary burden that has reduced the rental housing stock across the country. 

Only in a politician’s utopian world of the future does interfering in the free market improve outcomes for consumers. 

I don’t for one minute think this is over. It will be a re-run of the post Brexit vote shenanigans with every legal and political attempt made to undo what Rishi has just done - but don’t let anyone kid themselves whatever they are doing will be more for their own interests than the good of the planet. 

1) Car pool lanes - like what they have had in that bastion of communism, the US, since the 1970s to reduce congestion for everyone - Commies

2) People who create the waste being asked to sort it out so it can be processed - what effrontery, better to send it in crates to third world countries and have their kids do it - saves on PPE too

3) Suggesting that I should pay a bit more tax to deter me from taking my 6th long haul holiday of the year as currently there is no practical way of reducing aircraft emissions, merely so that our children and grand children have air to breathe, water to drink and food to eat.  Barstewards

4) Suggesting that I switch to a method of heating my home that can use UK produced renewable electricity rather than natural gas that increases demand for and thus boosts Russia's war machine and makes this country politically and economically vulnerable. !!!!!!

5) Banning the use of fossil fuel powered devices that are strategically manoeuvred through our most populous areas so that their harmful emissions can be breathed deep into the lungs of as many members of society, including children, as possible - sacrilege

6) Addressing the market distortion that means that those who rent suffer via higher bills as a result of the decision by landlords not to insulate their properties as the landlords bear the cost whereas the renters scoop the benefits - even though the overall rate of return would make it a no brainer if the overall costs and benefits were compared - begone with your economic literacy

7) Suggest that I could choose a source of protein that is better for my health and does not lead to my needing way more than my share of the available agricultural land and water resulting in deforestation and planet warming methane emissions whilst the poor cope on 1000 calories a day - let them eat cake

thevilla

"I'm with Rishi"

And his cynical attempt to improve his poll position.  Pure politics and nothing to do with policy. Government's 'should' do the right thing and bring the electorate with them. This is not the right thing.

JKenH

michaels said:

JKenH said:

I’m with Rishi

We’ve all had a few hours to reflect on the changes and much disappointment has been expressed but largely that is coming from ideologues,sectors who have vested interests and those hoping to make political capital out of the changes. Perhaps, not surprisingly, there was more reaction to the leak of the changes than the announcement itself with various parties hoping it wasn’t too late to get Rishi to change his mind. In fact the BBC (in disbelief that this could actually be happening) suggested that the leak was just the government sounding out the ideal to gauge reaction. Well, good on Rishi, he didn’t flinch.

So what does it all mean in practice?

The ban on ICE vehicles being moved.

This I believe was essential both practically and politically. EVs are coming - they are getting better and cheaper and with bigger batteries (yes, I know that means more CO2 in manufacture and use) will be soon be practical for most of the population. Just because EVs are suitable for 95% of journeys, though, doesn’t make them suitable for 95% of users. There will always be edge cases and forcing a ban only fuels the fire of resistance and legitimises the edge case argument. If there is no ban that % who believe an EV will never work for them have nothing to complain about. What will be the point of the EVs will never work stories in the DM and DT - it’s like complaining that Caterhams are impractical. Fine, if they don’t work for you that’s ok because now you don’t have to buy one. Having a ban take effect in 2030 5 years ahead of Europe alway smacked of the ideologues running the country rather than the pragmatists. In 5 years time EVs will be so common on our roads that they are just another form of propulsion not an impractical invention of the socialist out to rule our lives - we don’t  need a ban, full stop. If EVs are better folk will buy them (new or used). Personally I think the moving of the ban has lifted one of the obstacles to widespread EV adoption - there is no longer a war to be fought; you make the decision on what works best for you and for most people that will be EVs. 

For the industry I can see the objections but should we make people buy cars they don’t want just to suit the manufacturers or should they make cars people want to buy - not the ones they want to sell? (Ford stopped making their best selling car, the Fiesta, because they thought they could force people to buy the more profitable Puma. Tesla are now building cars without indicator stalks - just ask yourself, why that is.)

If you have to pass a law to make someone buy something they don’t want then there is something wrong with the product; that is not a good law and  is never a good political move. Good luck to Labour if they are planning on reversing the shift to 2035. 

The oil boiler ban being moved to align with the gas boiler date

i never understood why new oil boilers were going to be banned in 2026 but new gas boilers could be bought until 2035, so the levelling out there is a good idea. People don’t  have oil boilers because they don’t want mains gas - we have a choice of oil or propane - both more expensive than mains gas. My boiler is 17 years old and going strong. As things were, I was going to be faced with a decision in the next 3 years as to whether to replace it with a new one at £2-3k or keep it until it dies and then get a heat pump - at what cost? Probably for me, with 20 radiators, it would be quite pricey and involve a lot of disruption. I can now defer that decision until heat pump costs come down and efficiency improves. 

Improving rented properties to EPC C standard

A lot of landlords with older houses have already left the market and sold up and others were considering doing so because of the expense of meeting the EPC standard and that has seriously impacted on rents. That’s the law of unintended consequences. I don’t have any rented properties but my son has a number of large student houses (5,6 and 7 bedroom). Anyone familiar with the EPC will know you need a much higher standard of insulation in a large house than a small one as the EPC is based on the cost of heating the property. Because of the floor area I struggled to reach a C for my own house with extra thick wall insulation, 300 m loft insulation, underfloor insulation and modern double glazed windows. The EPC system is not fit for purpose and demanding a C rating in large Victorian houses was an unnecessary burden that has reduced the rental housing stock across the country. 

Only in a politician’s utopian world of the future does interfering in the free market improve outcomes for consumers. 

I don’t for one minute think this is over. It will be a re-run of the post Brexit vote shenanigans with every legal and political attempt made to undo what Rishi has just done - but don’t let anyone kid themselves whatever they are doing will be more for their own interests than the good of the planet. 

1) Car pool lanes - like what they have had in that bastion of communism, the US, since the 1970s to reduce congestion for everyone - Commies

2) People who create the waste being asked to sort it out so it can be processed - what effrontery, better to send it in crates to third world countries and have their kids do it - saves on PPE too

3) Suggesting that I should pay a bit more tax to deter me from taking my 6th long haul holiday of the year as currently there is no practical way of reducing aircraft emissions, merely so that our children and grand children have air to breathe, water to drink and food to eat.  Barstewards

4) Suggesting that I switch to a method of heating my home that can use UK produced renewable electricity rather than natural gas that increases demand for and thus boosts Russia's war machine and makes this country politically and economically vulnerable. !!!!!!

5) Banning the use of fossil fuel powered devices that are strategically manoeuvred through our most populous areas so that their harmful emissions can be breathed deep into the lungs of as many members of society, including children, as possible - sacrilege

6) Addressing the market distortion that means that those who rent suffer via higher bills as a result of the decision by landlords not to insulate their properties as the landlords bear the cost whereas the renters scoop the benefits - even though the overall rate of return would make it a no brainer if the overall costs and benefits were compared - begone with your economic literacy

7) Suggest that I could choose a source of protein that is better for my health and does not lead to my needing way more than my share of the available agricultural land and water resulting in deforestation and planet warming methane emissions whilst the poor cope on 1000 calories a day - let them eat cake

1) Car pool lanes may work for office commuters but don’t most office workers work from home now? Or is that only in central and local government. How does a car pool lane deal with the worst urban congestion caused by the school run. I would be all for banning ICEs within 400m of schools. Not only don’t they work for schools but neither do they work for Jo or Jane Bloggs trying to get to work on an industrial estate. Car sharing by choice makes sense but imposing car sharing is a very urban centric point of view.

2) I don’t agree with Rishi on the waste issue. I abhor waste and reuse our plastic food storage bags until they have holes in them. I would support a tax on polystyrene and bubble wrap. I have bags and bags of the latter in our loft because I won’t put it in the bin. 

3) I’m with you on that one. I haven’t flown since 2006 but that’s my choice. Others choose to fly while I spend my carbon allowance motor racing. 

4) if you are really into heat pumps I suspect you can make it work but the reluctance of many ardent eco warriors to ditch their GCH (because it’s cheaper) suggests this is more an ideological argument than a pragmatic one. And what about those who live where heat pumps aren’t practical?

5) Again the law of unintended consequences may have come into play if the ban on new ICE vehicles in 2030 had stood. Modern ICE cars are much much cleaner than old ones and by 2025 cars will have to meet new Euro 7 regs which are ridiculously tight on emissions. The 2030 ban would have meant fewer of these ‘clean’ cars making it onto the road and the die hard petrol heads would have been chugging around in their old ICE cars spewing out pollution for much longer.  The ban in 2030 would have meant no one would bother developing cleaner Euro7 cars and we are stuck with the  old ones. Maybe  Ford are so upset with Rishi  because they have ditched their 2 best selling cars and left the field open for the like of Toyota with their small to medium hybrid cars.  ULEZ is encouraging drivers to commute in 40 year old cars with attendant emissions far higher than the cars Sadiq Khan is taxing off the roads. We have been breathing harmful emissions all our lives just as our ancestors did sitting round the wood fires in their round houses. Are you old enough to remember the city smogs that brought in the Clean Air Acts? Have you noticed how many people live to be 100 now compared to a generation ago? I don’t like pollution any more than you do but the quality of our air now is such that we have had to find a new bogeyman - particulates. So all we would be doing is driving 2030-35 new cars off the road if the 2030 ban had stood and they are not a pollution issue (except to the pro EV lobby). What about pollution from gas stoves - is that ok because it mainly affects those in the house?

6) Should we subsidise private home owners who live in houses with a poor EPC rating? Very few people take EPC ratings into account when buying a house so it is no surprise that renters don’t. They rent the house based on facilities and location and price, not bills. So who should foot the bill? Landlords- i5 would seem. My son’s houses are rented out inclusive of bills so he picks up the tab. This EPC requirement was brought in for political reasons. Bash the landlords -that will be popular. Just as in Scotland though where the rent controls have resulted in a 20% hike in rents since 2023, politicians go for headlines and damn the (unintended) consequences.

7) Telling people they can’t eat meat (or even worse taxing it) does not go down well except with a small section of the electorate (who forgive me saying so) are often aligned with extreme green values and principles and believe they have the right to impose their values on other people. Sadly, for those extremists, we live in a democracy.

JKenH

thevilla said:

"I'm with Rishi"

And his cynical attempt to improve his poll position.  Pure politics and nothing to do with policy. Government's 'should' do the right thing and bring the electorate with them. This is not the right thing.

He’s a politician, what did you expect? And Labour always do the right thing? Anybody remember the Iraq war? And Jo Biden asking the Saudis to pump more oil?

The whole point of the measures Rishi announced was to bring the (majority) of the people with him towards Ne Zero by 2050. He’s not going to please all of the people all of the time. I and most people I know are happy as for once pragmatism reigns over idealism and we once again have choices on the issues under consideration. 

michaels

I always say that whilst heat pumps may be expensive to both install and run, they are better than being cold which seems to be the only other low carbon option.

There is a problem with rented accommodation, the benefit from increasing efficiency accrues to the renter but is paid for by the landlord.  Traditional economics suggest that market intervention is needed to fix such 'externality' problems.  I can agree that simply placing an obligation on the landlord has unintended consequences but there is a win-win here that the market does not facilitate.

thevilla

Deferring the ban on gas and oil heating by 5 years will simple defer the training of qualified engineers.  We'll be in the same position in 5 years time as now!

Is this change by the govt an admission they can't fix the economy and high inflation is with us for at least another 5 years?  Apparently it's to help us all out. Ha ha.

Better build the new Thames barrier a metre higher than planned.

JKenH

thevilla said:

Deferring the ban on gas and oil heating by 5 years will simple defer the training of qualified engineers.  We'll be in the same position in 5 years time as now!

Is this change by the govt an admission they can't fix the economy and high inflation is with us for at least another 5 years?  Apparently it's to help us all out. Ha ha.

Better build the new Thames barrier a metre higher than planned.

The oil boiler ban was due in 2026 and gas was 2035 anyway so the additional emissions are not that huge. Hopefully sea level rise will be a bit less than a metre in the circumstances. 

JKenH

michaels said:

I always say that whilst heat pumps may be expensive to both install and run, they are better than being cold which seems to be the only other low carbon option.

There is a problem with rented accommodation, the benefit from increasing efficiency accrues to the renter but is paid for by the landlord.  Traditional economics suggest that market intervention is needed to fix such 'externality' problems.  I can agree that simply placing an obligation on the landlord has unintended consequences but there is a win-win here that the market does not facilitate.

I had been interested in the idea of a heat pump (as I am on oil rather than gas) but never pursued it and now probably won’t as since I started getting paid for export on Octopus Flux I have not switched on either of our A2ASHPs. I have also, incidentally, put on hold my thoughts of getting another EV because of paid export. I don’t know how others have been affected by Flux export rates but it does push the marginal cost of using electricity to 18p or 30p/kWh if using solar or 29/40p if buying from the grid during the day. With a COP of 3 in winter (when I hardly have any spare generation) an ASHP would be costing me 10/13.3p per kWh of heat which is more than oil and I imagine (I’m guessing) at least twice the cost of gas.

I have today chopped 10 barrow loads of logs ready for the colder weather making the most of my open fire until that is banned (if that is possible) 

Cardew

thevilla said:

Better build the new Thames barrier a metre higher than planned.

I am glad that the emissions from China, India, USA etc have no effect on our wonderful River Thames!!

JKenH

More comment on the costs wind developers are facing.

Warranty issues drive turbine losses…

Some of the OEM losses are down to warranty issues – this means the turbines have not performed as expected requiring the manufacturers to compensate windfarm developers and rectify problems. Back in June, Siemens warned that components in wind turbines made by its subsidiary Siemens Gamesa are wearing out faster than expected. The problem appears to involve critical parts such as bearings and blades, and is affecting both newly installed and older turbines in up to 15% – 30% of the installed on-shore fleet. 

Management believes the cost of remediation could exceed €1 billion, effectively wiping out more than a third of the profit the company is expected to make doing maintenance on wind turbines it already installed. This has led to speculation – denied by the company – that it has suspended sales of on-shore turbines until the problems are resolved. There are further reports the company may close factories in order to stem losses.

Siemens is also finding problems with its off-shore turbines, which are failing to meet productivity targets due to rising material costs and manufacturing delays. Privately this is attributed to the pressure for ever larger turbines which are harder to get right.

https://watt-logic.com/2023/10/10/off-shore-wind-targets-at-risk/