unbeliever Posted September 5, 2015 Share Posted September 5, 2015 The Conservative Government axed plans to make all new homes carbon neutral from 2016, drawing widespread criticism from house builders and environmentalists. The zero carbon homes policy was meant to dramatically reduce CO2 emissions from housing, which currently make up nearly a third of all the UK’s greenhouse gas emissions. They're trying to keep house prices under reasonable control and this plan was not very practical. If, as the environmentalists keep insisting, renewable energy is either about to become or already is, cheaper than nuclear or fossil, what's the problem? It shouldn't need special laws or subsidies to take over as that should happen naturally. If wind and solar are good value, they'll pay for themselves and the private sector will build them because of the profit they'll make from selling the power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Cid Posted September 5, 2015 Share Posted September 5, 2015 They're trying to keep house prices under reasonable control and this plan was not very practical. You asked for evidence of this "going backwards", and I provided it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbeliever Posted September 5, 2015 Share Posted September 5, 2015 You asked for evidence of this "going backwards", and I provided it. So you did. But did this abolished plan make a meaningful contribution to reducing CO2? How do you make a home carbon neutral? You do after all have to manufacture and assemble all the parts of the home. Or was this not included? What about the CO2 from heating said home? Was it fitted with wind turbine, solar panels, and a huge bank of batteries? How much more would this home have cost than a normal home of the same size? If the plan was essentially nonsense, then nothing has been lost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Cid Posted September 5, 2015 Share Posted September 5, 2015 How do you make a home carbon neutral? How much more would this home have cost than a normal home of the same size? If the plan was essentially nonsense, then nothing has been lost. Cardiff University say they have built a house that exports more power to the grid than it uses. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-33544831 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbeliever Posted September 5, 2015 Share Posted September 5, 2015 Cardiff University say they have built a house that exports more power to the grid than it uses. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-33544831 That's trivial. All it takes is enough solar panels. Does it export power at times when that power is needed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Cid Posted September 5, 2015 Share Posted September 5, 2015 That's trivial. All it takes is enough solar panels. Does it export power at times when that power is needed? If all new homes have the best insulation and energy efficiency, then the grid wont need to generate quite so much. Has this 2016 zero target been replaced by a lesser target? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricgem2002 Posted September 5, 2015 Share Posted September 5, 2015 That's trivial. All it takes is enough solar panels. Does it export power at times when that power is needed? its not trivial its showing the way forward and what can be achieved solar panels are not a waste of time. you keep going on about gas and how efficient it is. I propose solar panels working in conjunction with gas at times when needed can be beneficial for the country now don't you agree:suspect: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbeliever Posted September 5, 2015 Share Posted September 5, 2015 (edited) its not trivial its showing the way forward and what can be achieved solar panels are not a waste of time. you keep going on about gas and how efficient it is. I propose solar panels working in conjunction with gas at times when needed can be beneficial for the country now don't you agree:suspect: Okay. Yes. You can put up enough solar panels and wind farms to power the country when it's sunny and/or windy. That's perfectly possible. You then need conventional power generation capable of filling in the gaps and/or a vast energy storage system. All my complaints are essentially based on the fact that the costs of solar and wind are not properly calculated. When calculating the cost of wind or solar per kWh there are 2 corrections that need to be made. 1. You should not include energy generated at times when it is not needed. Gas etc do not generate power when it is not needed which is arranged by having a subset os power stations which can be ramped up and down very quickly. 2. You should include the cost of backup and/or storage for when energy is needed but wind and solar cannot provide it. Only when these 2 corrections are made do you have the true cost of living on renewable energy and it makes an enormous difference. Correction 2 also applies to the CO2 from renewables. If rather than having 100% capacity of gas in a mixture of power stations: some base load and some on demand; you have to have 80% capacity in gas, all on demand for when it's neither wind nor sunny; then you may actually produce more CO2 than will the 100% gas case! Edited September 5, 2015 by unbeliever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricgem2002 Posted September 5, 2015 Share Posted September 5, 2015 Okay. Yes. You can put up enough solar panels and wind farms to power the country when it's sunny and/or windy. That's perfectly possible. You then need conventional power generation capable of filling in the gaps and/or a vast energy storage system. All my complaints are essentially based on the fact that the costs of solar ! ah so I was right then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apelike Posted September 5, 2015 Share Posted September 5, 2015 (edited) When calculating the cost of wind or solar per kWh there are 2 corrections that need to be made. 1. You should not include energy generated at times when it is not needed. Why and who said it is not needed? The energy being produced by offshore wind power is essentially available in varying amounts 24/7 and is also capable of being reduced when not needed. Solar is different but still produces electricity during the daylight hours which is also used. Shouldn't we also include Nuclear in that as well? as it also produces electricity when not needed as it cant be ramped up or down quickly on demand like gas, which will eventually run out at some time. The new Nuclear power plant owners are also being guaranteed a price per MWH and that is what is being generated and not just used. The costs of wind power is also coming down. The offshore wind farms are estimating price reductions from £100MWH to £85MWH. The new farms being commissioned have estimated the cost to go from £85MWH to around £60MWH. All this is happening now. If we wait for the Nuclear plants to eventually be built, which are already being delayed, over budget and with the costs creeping up we will be stuffed. BTW some of the cost of offshore wind is is also passed onto the crown as it owns the seabed and leases have to be paid. Edited September 5, 2015 by apelike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now