BBC article - Farewell radiators? Testing out electric infrared wallpaper

EssexHebridean

username said:

I never get this obsession with making everything electric.

As people have said in this thread, electrical heating (and hot water) is the most expensive method and costs.

I understand there are targets to cut emissions, ban on gas boilers etc but in a practical sense how does this benefit the householders, when they get a ridiculous bill each month.

I often read here of people are having an EV, heat pump, storage battery, electric car etc and are all happy being electrified, gas-free and charging outside of peak hours, but is the capex ever affordable to anyone on an average/below average salary, let alone having a building suitable for all these devices?

Electric heating can be surprisingly economical - NSH’s for example, where someone also load shifts as much else as possible onto a reasonable night rate. Sure, the modern NSHs aren’t a small investment to start with, but they may well still work out cheaper than a full from-scratch GCH install. On the right supplier’s E7 tariff, it’s now possible to heat via electricity for less than gas would cost.

ariarnia

Scot_39 said:

ariarnia said:

im never sure why the bbc run 'adverts' like this but it was good to see the sensible advice about it probably being more expensive to run.

i really can't see an upside given the cost is about the same as air pump (with the grant) but you dont get the cop.  

Pretty difficult to fit a conventional heat pump if living in a block of flats.

Some people here suggesting the smaller air con / nsh panel sized heaters - that need vents drilling etc - but that may be another issue for flats.

And housing associations have been known to rip out NSH and replace with cheap panel heaters rather than proper modern HHR NSH - so don't think they are all driven by the financial interests of their occupants.

thanks to thermodynamics panel heaters wont be any cheaper or more expensive than electric wall paper (1kw of energy is 1kw of heat no matter the type of electric heating unless its a heat exchanger or stored heat at a cheaper rate).

but panel heaters will be easier to fix and replace if something happens.

so i still can't see any practical benifit to this method of electric heating. 

markin

username said:

I never get this obsession with making everything electric.

As people have said in this thread, electrical heating (and hot water) is the most expensive method and costs.

I understand there are targets to cut emissions, ban on gas boilers etc but in a practical sense how does this benefit the householders, when they get a ridiculous bill each month.

I often read here of people are having an EV, heat pump, storage battery, electric car etc and are all happy being electrified, gas-free and charging outside of peak hours, but is the capex ever affordable to anyone on an average/below average salary, let alone having a building suitable for all these devices?

Gas to ASHP is rarely done or recommended, The usual case is Oil, lpg or a house with NSH, But yes its a very long payback on install cost.

Solar is a 6 year payback so that's an easy choice.

An EV has to be high mileage to make large savings on Fuel and a faster payback, But most cars are on lease so as long as the total cost is lower its a win.

mumf

I found the article interesting. When one realises that the ‘rule’ is that new houses will not be allowed gas boilers quite soon, then electricity will be the fuel / power available to them. Obviously ASHP? Gas will run out ultimately too. We are pushing electricity via wind and solar now (/even though they pretty much don’t work in Winter when we need them!) but electricity will be the way forward ultimately. We are all electric here, and large infra red panels are rather good. Not absolute,but part of our ‘system’. 

  However, that form of heating is not like gas CH. The ‘habit’ that has formed over the brief history of central heating ( about 50 years) is one of wandering around the house half naked! Such heating as electricity means wearing clothes!!! It also means heating the rooms you are in. As stated on the BBC article ,’why heat a bedroom you are not in?’ . Indeed. 

 So it’s an interesting idea with the ‘wallpaper’. 

matt_drummer

username said:

I never get this obsession with making everything electric.

As people have said in this thread, electrical heating (and hot water) is the most expensive method and costs.

I understand there are targets to cut emissions, ban on gas boilers etc but in a practical sense how does this benefit the householders, when they get a ridiculous bill each month.

I often read here of people are having an EV, heat pump, storage battery, electric car etc and are all happy being electrified, gas-free and charging outside of peak hours, but is the capex ever affordable to anyone on an average/below average salary, let alone having a building suitable for all these devices?

I know this is a money saving  orientated forum.

But moving away from burning fossil fuels is not about saving money.

It's about cleaning up the air we breath and that may well come at a financial cost.

Of course, anybody going down this route at the moment will try to do it in a way that works for them financially..

If you can afford to invest in solar panels and batteries then air source heat pumps can be made to work in a way that costs less to run each month than gas.

A lot of people have equity in their house that could be used to fund the investment required.

But right now, for most people, I would imagine that air source heat pumps are not going to give a quick return on the investment.

SnakePlissken

matt_drummer said:

username said:

I never get this obsession with making everything electric.

As people have said in this thread, electrical heating (and hot water) is the most expensive method and costs.

I understand there are targets to cut emissions, ban on gas boilers etc but in a practical sense how does this benefit the householders, when they get a ridiculous bill each month.

I often read here of people are having an EV, heat pump, storage battery, electric car etc and are all happy being electrified, gas-free and charging outside of peak hours, but is the capex ever affordable to anyone on an average/below average salary, let alone having a building suitable for all these devices?

I know this is a money saving  orientated forum.

But moving away from burning fossil fuels is not about saving money.

It's about cleaning up the air we breath and that may well come at a financial cost.

Of course, anybody going down this route at the moment will try to do it in a way that works for them financially..

If you can afford to invest in solar panels and batteries then air source heat pumps can be made to work in a way that costs less to run each month than gas.

A lot of people have equity in their house that could be used to fund the investment required.

But right now, for most people, I would imagine that air source heat pumps are not going to give a quick return on the investment.

I think it also depends how the electricity is generated.
If majority is from renewables then production cost is low. SSE are now saying power generated from nuclear or renewables should cost substantialy less.

https://www.ft.com/content/115768a0-c358-40fb-aa0c-407a704db988 ( if link does not work google "sse lower cost for renewable and nuclear energy")

A mix of hydro, pumped storage, wind, solar, tidal and wave can produce 100% renewables.

Currently Scotland sees on average at least 80% from non fossil fuel.

And total production from renewables matches 99% of scotlands power usage. Though some of this is exported. Current plans see another 15 to  20GW of planned renewables though.
Part of this is at least a  further 4 to 5 pumped storage projects which would increase capacity in Scotland to nearly 5gw. Coir glas alone is 1.4 GW and can run non stop for 30 hours. These provide a storage of renewables for days when wind capacity is reduced. And can be topped up overnight when grid  usage is lower and there is spare capacity.

If above technologies were rolled  out in England, then England could achieve a higher mix of low cost generation, which should lower unit cost. Its fossil fuel produced electricity especially gas that makes the unit cost high.

Dogger bank should help as that is a very large offshore windfarm.

https://doggerbank.com/