Unbelievable EPC recommendations

[Spike]

Some friends of ours are buying a house, and out of interest I looked up
the recommendations of the Environmental Performance Certificate, available
on the .gov web site and quoted below. The house is a two-bedroom
end-of-terrace, with no gas supply.

Who in their right mind is going to spend £4000-£6000 on floor insulation,
which will have a payback period of 40 to 60 years?

Or install solar water heating for a similar cost and payback period?

Cavity wall insulation at 2 to 6 years payback is feasible, as is high heat
retention storage heaters at 2-4 years.

Solar panels at 7 to 10 years is getting to be an outlier.

Star saving and payback is improvement of the hot water tank insulation,
payback in 6 to 12 weeks.

This whole charade seems predicated on impelling people to put money into
the solar rip-off industry, for no real benefit to the owners.

If this was my house, I’d insulate the hot water tank, and think about CWI,
being aware of the issues surrounding that, and put in the storage heaters,
for a cost of 4K. I’d then invest the £17k saved, the interest paying for
the ‘losses’ of not installing the floor insulation and solar fancies.


=====
Step 1: Cavity wall insulation
Typical installation cost
£500 - £1,500
Typical yearly saving
£265
Potential rating after completing step 1
26 F

Step 2: Floor insulation (solid floor)
Typical installation cost
£4,000 - £6,000
Typical yearly saving
£96
Potential rating after completing steps 1 and 2
28 F

Step 3: Hot water cylinder insulation
Increase hot water cylinder insulation
Typical installation cost
£15 - £30
Typical yearly saving
£141
Potential rating after completing steps 1 to 3
31 F

Step 4: High heat retention storage heaters
Typical installation cost
£1,600 - £2,400
Typical yearly saving
£834
Potential rating after completing steps 1 to 4
61 D

Step 5: Solar water heating
Typical installation cost
£4,000 - £6,000
Typical yearly saving
£97
Potential rating after completing steps 1 to 5
63 D

Step 6: Solar photovoltaic panels, 2.5 kWp
Typical installation cost
£3,500 - £5,500
Typical yearly saving
£534
Potential rating after completing steps 1 to 6
77 C
=====

[Theo]

Post by Spike
Some friends of ours are buying a house, and out of interest I looked up
the recommendations of the Environmental Performance Certificate, available
on the .gov web site and quoted below. The house is a two-bedroom
end-of-terrace, with no gas supply.
Who in their right mind is going to spend £4000-£6000 on floor insulation,
which will have a payback period of 40 to 60 years?
Or install solar water heating for a similar cost and payback period?
Cavity wall insulation at 2 to 6 years payback is feasible, as is high heat
retention storage heaters at 2-4 years.
Solar panels at 7 to 10 years is getting to be an outlier.
Star saving and payback is improvement of the hot water tank insulation,
payback in 6 to 12 weeks.
This whole charade seems predicated on impelling people to put money into
the solar rip-off industry, for no real benefit to the owners.
If this was my house, I’d insulate the hot water tank, and think about CWI,
being aware of the issues surrounding that, and put in the storage heaters,
for a cost of 4K. I’d then invest the £17k saved, the interest paying for
the ‘losses’ of not installing the floor insulation and solar fancies.

One of the many flaws with EPCs is that the EPC lasts for 10 years, while
the current sensible recommendations can vary, both in cost and
appropriateness. For example, back in the early 2010s biomass boilers and
domestic wind turbines appeared towards the bottom (the 'increasingly
desperate' section). Those technologies haven't panned out, but yet they're
still on those EPCs. The small 2.5kWp PV, solar water heating and storage
heater recommendation suggests this is a relatively old EPC.

As you say, somebody can easily tell that ripping up all the floors to
install insulation makes no economic sense - unless they were ripping up all
the floors anyway, in which case it might. But at least they've given you
data by which you can tell it's not worth it.

What I find more interesting is the improvements in score - ripping up all
the floors only gets you an increase of two points. The score is a
simplified code for the rdSAP energy consumption numbers - because the EPC
is only a drive-by exercise (they don't actually do room by room heat loss
calculations) the score hides a lot of the inaccuracy. However they do give
a kWh/year heating figure which is more useful.

It's surprising that the biggest 30-point score boost is the storage heaters
- I wonder what they have at the moment? I wonder if the projected cost
saving is based on mid-2010s ideas of offpeak electricity pricing?

Basically the overall problem with the EPC is it's trying to do too much
with too little. Buyers want to know facts like what kind of boiler there
is, whether the walls are solid or cavity and how much the place will cost
to heat. Sellers want to pay as little as possible and don't want to pay
for a proper job. Assessors want to do the job in as short a time as
possible, which is how you end up with £50 EPCs. The government wants to
have everything in a standardised format and minimise variability from
assessor to assessor. Result is that all these conflicting interests
conspire to make something a bit crap.

Theo

[alan_m]

Post by Theo
Basically the overall problem with the EPC is it's trying to do too much
with too little. Buyers want to know facts like what kind of boiler there
is, whether the walls are solid or cavity and how much the place will cost
to heat.

Buyers can do a web search on the house energy use for the past year -
as mentioned a few weeks back on this newsgroup.

Out of interest I checked my energy consumption of my two adjoining
neighbours (terrace houses). One neighbour who is end of terrace used
25% more than me while the other was approx the same. However I wasn't
necessary comparing like with like as I don't know what temperatures
they like to heat the house to. I do know that both have modern
condensing gas boilers, no solar or whole house batteries.

[Chris Green]

Post by alan_m

Post by Theo
Basically the overall problem with the EPC is it's trying to do too much
with too little. Buyers want to know facts like what kind of boiler there
is, whether the walls are solid or cavity and how much the place will cost
to heat.

Buyers can do a web search on the house energy use for the past year -
as mentioned a few weeks back on this newsgroup.

This surely only works if your neighbours have gone to the trouble of
entering the data somewhere.

[Andy Burns]

Post by Chris Green

Post by alan_m
Buyers can do a web search on the house energy use for the past year -
as mentioned a few weeks back on this newsgroup.

This surely only works if your neighbours have gone to the trouble of
entering the data somewhere.

There is a central agency (or separate ones for elec and gas) which
knows every household's consumption, presumably reported by your energy
co, in my case it agrees exactly with the annual consumption on my
bills, it's used by comparison sites etc

[The Natural Philosopher]

Post by Andy Burns

Post by Chris Green

Post by alan_m
Buyers can do a web search on the house energy use for the past year -
as mentioned a few weeks back on this newsgroup.

This surely only works if your neighbours have gone to the trouble of
entering the data somewhere.

There is a central agency (or separate ones for elec and gas) which
knows every household's consumption, presumably reported by your  energy
co, in my case it agrees exactly with the annual consumption on my
bills, it's used by comparison sites etc

How does it know my Oil consumption?

[Pamela]

Post by Andy Burns

Post by Chris Green

Post by alan_m
Buyers can do a web search on the house energy use for the past year
- as mentioned a few weeks back on this newsgroup.

This surely only works if your neighbours have gone to the trouble of
entering the data somewhere.

There is a central agency (or separate ones for elec and gas) which
knows every household's consumption, presumably reported by your
energy co, in my case it agrees exactly with the annual consumption on
my bills, it's used by comparison sites etc

What's the link for this site which shoes a particular house's energy
consumption?

[Theo]

Post by alan_m

Post by Theo
Basically the overall problem with the EPC is it's trying to do too much
with too little. Buyers want to know facts like what kind of boiler there
is, whether the walls are solid or cavity and how much the place will cost
to heat.

Buyers can do a web search on the house energy use for the past year -
as mentioned a few weeks back on this newsgroup.

True, but it doesn't give a good picture because you don't know usage
patterns. Do they run the heating at a constant 25C, or do they run it for
one hour a day because they can't afford any more? Do they have 5 teenage
girls having two showers a day, or a single person having a bath once a
week?

Post by alan_m
Out of interest I checked my energy consumption of my two adjoining
neighbours (terrace houses). One neighbour who is end of terrace used
25% more than me while the other was approx the same. However I wasn't
necessary comparing like with like as I don't know what temperatures
they like to heat the house to. I do know that both have modern
condensing gas boilers, no solar or whole house batteries.

Exactly. And that comparison works because you know the houses are similar,
so you can factor out things you know to be the same. But if there are two
houses with more differences (eg a semi and a detached) you can't tell
what's due to the fabric and what's due to the behaviour.

It's better than nothing to have usage figures, but the idea of the EPC is
to be standardised so you can compare on a like for like basis.

Theo

[RJH]

Post by Theo

Post by alan_m

Post by Theo
Basically the overall problem with the EPC is it's trying to do too much
with too little. Buyers want to know facts like what kind of boiler there
is, whether the walls are solid or cavity and how much the place will cost
to heat.

Buyers can do a web search on the house energy use for the past year -
as mentioned a few weeks back on this newsgroup.

True, but it doesn't give a good picture because you don't know usage
patterns. Do they run the heating at a constant 25C, or do they run it for
one hour a day because they can't afford any more? Do they have 5 teenage
girls having two showers a day, or a single person having a bath once a
week?

Post by alan_m
Out of interest I checked my energy consumption of my two adjoining
neighbours (terrace houses). One neighbour who is end of terrace used
25% more than me while the other was approx the same. However I wasn't
necessary comparing like with like as I don't know what temperatures
they like to heat the house to. I do know that both have modern
condensing gas boilers, no solar or whole house batteries.

Exactly. And that comparison works because you know the houses are similar,
so you can factor out things you know to be the same. But if there are two
houses with more differences (eg a semi and a detached) you can't tell
what's due to the fabric and what's due to the behaviour.
It's better than nothing to have usage figures, but the idea of the EPC is
to be standardised so you can compare on a like for like basis.

I just looked at my mid-terrace old house - the new owners use twice as much
electricity, and 2.5 times the gas as I did.

I did tend to heat the whole house, but only to 14C in the day/overnight, and
18 in the evening. I'm genuinely fine with that. So I'd imagine they keep it
at 20C ish all of the time. They've got 2 children, whereas it's just me most
of the time.

I'm baffled by the electricity consumption. Can't think what they're up to.

[Andy Burns]

Post by RJH
I just looked at my mid-terrace old house - the new owners use twice
as much electricity . They've got 2 children
I'm baffled by the electricity consumption.

55" baby-sitter?

[Theo]

Post by Andy Burns

Post by RJH
I just looked at my mid-terrace old house - the new owners use twice
as much electricity . They've got 2 children
I'm baffled by the electricity consumption.

55" baby-sitter?

EV?
Gaming PC?
Electric cooking?

[alan_m]

Post by Theo

Post by Andy Burns

Post by RJH
I just looked at my mid-terrace old house - the new owners use twice
as much electricity . They've got 2 children
I'm baffled by the electricity consumption.

55" baby-sitter?

EV?
Gaming PC?
Electric cooking?

Bigger fridge or Freezer
More cups of tea/coffee
A TV in every room
More electrical gadgets

[The Natural Philosopher]

Post by alan_m

Post by Theo

Post by Andy Burns

Post by RJH
I just looked at my mid-terrace old house - the new owners use twice
as much electricity . They've got 2 children
I'm baffled by the electricity consumption.

55" baby-sitter?

EV?
Gaming PC?
Electric cooking?

Bigger fridge or Freezer
More cups of tea/coffee
A TV in every room
More electrical gadgets

Sigh:.
Everyone misses the obvious

Cannabis farm

[alan_m]

Post by The Natural Philosopher
Sigh:.
Everyone misses the obvious
Cannabis farm

That would be un-metered energy use

[The Natural Philosopher]

Post by alan_m

Post by The Natural Philosopher
Sigh:.
Everyone misses the obvious
Cannabis farm

That would be un-metered energy use

Depends how professional they were

[The Natural Philosopher]

Post by RJH
I'm baffled by the electricity consumption. Can't think what they're up to.

Really?

Bless!

[Andrew]

Post by Theo

Post by alan_m

Post by Theo
Basically the overall problem with the EPC is it's trying to do too much
with too little. Buyers want to know facts like what kind of boiler there
is, whether the walls are solid or cavity and how much the place will cost
to heat.

Buyers can do a web search on the house energy use for the past year -
as mentioned a few weeks back on this newsgroup.

True, but it doesn't give a good picture because you don't know usage
patterns. Do they run the heating at a constant 25C, or do they run it for
one hour a day because they can't afford any more? Do they have 5 teenage
girls having two showers a day, or a single person having a bath once a
week?

As often as that ? :-)

[John Rumm]

Post by alan_m

Post by Theo
Basically the overall problem with the EPC is it's trying to do too much
with too little.  Buyers want to know facts like what kind of boiler
there
is, whether the walls are solid or cavity and how much the place will cost
to heat.

Buyers can do a web search on the house energy use for the past year -
as mentioned a few weeks back on this newsgroup.

I missed that, have you got a link?
--
Cheers,

John.

/=================================================================\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\=================================================================/

[Theo]

Post by John Rumm

Post by alan_m

Post by Theo
Basically the overall problem with the EPC is it's trying to do too much
with too little.  Buyers want to know facts like what kind of boiler
there
is, whether the walls are solid or cavity and how much the place will cost
to heat.

Buyers can do a web search on the house energy use for the past year -
as mentioned a few weeks back on this newsgroup.

I missed that, have you got a link?

https://energy.which.co.uk/
'compare energy prices'
then enter the address details and click through all the screens accepting
the defaults.

It shows you the recorded annual gas and electric consumption for the
property.

Theo

[Handsome Jack]

Post by Theo

Post by John Rumm

Post by alan_m
Buyers can do a web search on the house energy use for the past year -
as mentioned a few weeks back on this newsgroup.

I missed that, have you got a link?

https://energy.which.co.uk/
'compare energy prices'
then enter the address details and click through all the screens
accepting the defaults.
It shows you the recorded annual gas and electric consumption for the
property.

I get to the page
"How do you pay for your energy?
Please select how you pay for your energy"
... Nothing else shows. There is no way of doing it. Pressing "continue"
does nothing.


Anyway, hasn't anybody objected to this on data protection grounds? No-one
has given their consent to this data being published, so what is the
justification for it?

[RJH]

Post by Handsome Jack

Post by Theo

Post by John Rumm

Post by alan_m
Buyers can do a web search on the house energy use for the past year -
as mentioned a few weeks back on this newsgroup.

I missed that, have you got a link?

https://energy.which.co.uk/
'compare energy prices'
then enter the address details and click through all the screens
accepting the defaults.
It shows you the recorded annual gas and electric consumption for the
property.

I get to the page
"How do you pay for your energy?
Please select how you pay for your energy"
... Nothing else shows. There is no way of doing it. Pressing "continue"
does nothing.

Just try any of the many comparison web sites. I think uswitch was one of the
more forthcoming.

Post by Handsome Jack
Anyway, hasn't anybody objected to this on data protection grounds? No-one
has given their consent to this data being published, so what is the
justification for it?

I agree, it's pretty poor.

[Handsome Jack]

Post by RJH

Post by Theo

Post by John Rumm

Post by alan_m
Buyers can do a web search on the house energy use for the past year -
as mentioned a few weeks back on this newsgroup.

I missed that, have you got a link?

https://energy.which.co.uk/
'compare energy prices'
then enter the address details and click through all the screens
accepting the defaults.
It shows you the recorded annual gas and electric consumption for the
property.

I get to the page "How do you pay for your energy?
Please select how you pay for your energy"
... Nothing else shows. There is no way of doing it. Pressing
"continue" does nothing.

Just try any of the many comparison web sites. I think uswitch was one
of the more forthcoming.

I don't understand what you mean by this or why it is relevant to the
Which? web site.

[Theo]

Post by Handsome Jack

Post by RJH

I get to the page "How do you pay for your energy?
Please select how you pay for your energy"
... Nothing else shows. There is no way of doing it. Pressing
"continue" does nothing.

Just try any of the many comparison web sites. I think uswitch was one
of the more forthcoming.

I don't understand what you mean by this or why it is relevant to the
Which? web site.

All the comparison sites get the data from the same clearing houses (one for
gas[1], one for electric[2]). How they look up or present that data may vary.
For example, Which refuses to progress if it thinks the address is a
business address.

It doesn't seem to work for every address - it may be that smart meters
don't report data via the clearing houses, or some other reason. Maybe one
comparison site is better at querying data from more sources than another?

Theo

[1] https://www.xoserve.com/products-services/data-products/gas-enquiry-service-ges/
[2] https://www.ecoes.co.uk/
spec:
https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/sites/default/files/docs/2019/11/annex_6_ees_service_definition_0.pdf

[Handsome Jack]

Post by Theo

Post by Handsome Jack

Post by RJH

I get to the page "How do you pay for your energy?
Please select how you pay for your energy"
... Nothing else shows. There is no way of doing it. Pressing
"continue" does nothing.

Just try any of the many comparison web sites. I think uswitch was
one of the more forthcoming.

I don't understand what you mean by this or why it is relevant to the
Which? web site.

All the comparison sites get the data from the same clearing houses (one
for gas[1], one for electric[2]). How they look up or present that data
may vary.

Do you mean that all the comparison sites have access to, and publish, the
energy costs of every [or most] property in the country, like Which seems
to? How and when did that happen?

Post by Theo
For example, Which refuses to progress if it thinks the address is a
business address.
It doesn't seem to work for every address - it may be that smart meters
don't report data via the clearing houses, or some other reason. Maybe
one comparison site is better at querying data from more sources than
another?
Theo
[1]
https://www.xoserve.com/products-services/data-products/gas-enquiry-

service-ges/

Post by Theo
[2] https://www.ecoes.co.uk/
https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/sites/default/files/docs/2019/11/

annex_6_ees_service_definition_0.pdf

[Theo]

Post by Handsome Jack
Do you mean that all the comparison sites have access to, and publish, the
energy costs of every [or most] property in the country, like Which seems
to? How and when did that happen?

Yes, although they aren't publishing it widely - they're just allowing
people to query it if switching 'their' supply (and realistically there's no
way to securely ID customers searching on a comparison site). It's part of
the infrastructure enabling smooth switching of suppliers, connected to MPAN
and other supply data:

https://www.switch-plan.co.uk/switch/ecoes/

Theo

[alan_m]

Post by Theo

Post by Handsome Jack
Do you mean that all the comparison sites have access to, and publish, the
energy costs of every [or most] property in the country, like Which seems
to? How and when did that happen?

Yes, although they aren't publishing it widely - they're just allowing
people to query it if switching 'their' supply (and realistically there's no
way to securely ID customers searching on a comparison site). It's part of
the infrastructure enabling smooth switching of suppliers, connected to MPAN
https://www.switch-plan.co.uk/switch/ecoes/
Theo

It does overcome the problem of people not knowing their typical annual
consumption and putting the monthly payments into the comparison sites.
The monthly payment was usually not a true reflection of usage as at the
end of the year the could be many £100s in credit, or in debt if no
meter readings had been given.

Now its likely that there are going to be more tariff choices it's more
important knowing your actual typical usage (and assuming that going
forward it's going to be very similar) to get the best deal on a
comparison site. For instance, if you are a very low user a tariff with
high unit cost without a standing daily charge may be the best option.
This may not come up as best if someone inputs their monthly over
payment as it indicates they are a higher user of energy.

[Handsome Jack]

Post by alan_m

Post by Theo

Post by Handsome Jack
Do you mean that all the comparison sites have access to, and publish,
the energy costs of every [or most] property in the country, like
Which seems to? How and when did that happen?

Yes, although they aren't publishing it widely - they're just allowing
people to query it if switching 'their' supply (and realistically
there's no way to securely ID customers searching on a comparison
site).

But each customer already knows, or can easily find out, what his annual
consumption is. It should be there on his bill.

It's part of the infrastructure enabling smooth switching of

Post by alan_m

Post by Theo
https://www.switch-plan.co.uk/switch/ecoes/
Theo

It does overcome the problem of people not knowing their typical annual
consumption and putting the monthly payments into the comparison sites.

That can be achieved by making suppliers publish it on their monthly
bills, as Octopus does already. It does not require the numbers to be
published to the world and his wife.

[RJH]

Post by Handsome Jack

Post by alan_m

Post by Theo

Post by Handsome Jack
Do you mean that all the comparison sites have access to, and publish,
the energy costs of every [or most] property in the country, like
Which seems to? How and when did that happen?

Yes, although they aren't publishing it widely - they're just allowing
people to query it if switching 'their' supply (and realistically
there's no way to securely ID customers searching on a comparison
site).

But each customer already knows, or can easily find out, what his annual
consumption is. It should be there on his bill.
It's part of the infrastructure enabling smooth switching of

Post by alan_m

Post by Theo
https://www.switch-plan.co.uk/switch/ecoes/
Theo

It does overcome the problem of people not knowing their typical annual
consumption and putting the monthly payments into the comparison sites.

That can be achieved by making suppliers publish it on their monthly
bills, as Octopus does already. It does not require the numbers to be
published to the world and his wife.

Per-dwelling data is available for sale. So these comaparison sites buy access
to the data. I suspect the argument runs that making it available makes for a
competitive market, and helps drive down prices.

One or two of the sites I looked at required the ticking of a 'I confirm this
is my property' box - a nod to some degree of awareness. But pretty much
useless at protecting someone's energy use data. I happen to think that's not
on - my energy consumption isn't anybody else's business unlss I decide
otherwise. Which I propobaly have in my contract's small print. But hey.

Incidentally, I found what looks to be accurate data for all but one of the 40
or so properties I looked at. But I had to use about 6 comparison websites.

The one that I couldn't get anything sensible for was a friend - it was
showing total consumption of 600kw/hr electricity for the year - no gas. I
thought that was suspiciously low, although she does have no battery solar.
Electric hot water and heating. But then I saw her in the street the other day
and she was off to the public baths for her weekly shower. So maybe it was
accurate . . .

[Handsome Jack]

Post by RJH

Post by Handsome Jack

Post by alan_m

Post by Theo

Post by Handsome Jack
Do you mean that all the comparison sites have access to, and publish,
the energy costs of every [or most] property in the country, like
Which seems to? How and when did that happen?

Yes, although they aren't publishing it widely - they're just
allowing people to query it if switching 'their' supply (and
realistically there's no way to securely ID customers searching on a
comparison site).

But each customer already knows, or can easily find out, what his
annual consumption is. It should be there on his bill.
It's part of the infrastructure enabling smooth switching of

Post by alan_m

Post by Theo
https://www.switch-plan.co.uk/switch/ecoes/
Theo

It does overcome the problem of people not knowing their typical
annual consumption and putting the monthly payments into the
comparison sites.

That can be achieved by making suppliers publish it on their monthly
bills, as Octopus does already. It does not require the numbers to be
published to the world and his wife.

Per-dwelling data is available for sale. So these comaparison sites buy
access to the data. I suspect the argument runs that making it available
makes for a competitive market, and helps drive down prices.

Yes, I expect it does. But does the data protection legislation list that
a permitted justification for disclosing personal data without consent? I
doubt it.

Post by RJH
One or two of the sites I looked at required the ticking of a 'I confirm
this is my property' box - a nod to some degree of awareness. But pretty
much useless at protecting someone's energy use data. I happen to think
that's not on - my energy consumption isn't anybody else's business
unlss I decide otherwise. Which I propobaly have in my contract's small
print. But hey.

AIUI the data protection legislation forbids that sort of "small print"
trickery.

Post by RJH
Incidentally, I found what looks to be accurate data for all but one of
the 40 or so properties I looked at. But I had to use about 6 comparison
websites.

Well, as I said, I couldn't actually use the Which? one, though I don't
understand why.

[Chris Green]

Post by Handsome Jack

Post by Theo
All the comparison sites get the data from the same clearing houses (one
for gas[1], one for electric[2]). How they look up or present that data
may vary.

Do you mean that all the comparison sites have access to, and publish, the
energy costs of every [or most] property in the country, like Which seems
to? How and when did that happen?

Well when I tried our road I couldn't find any data, just a request to
enter my consumption and costs.

Post by Handsome Jack

Post by Theo
For example, Which refuses to progress if it thinks the address is a
business address.
It doesn't seem to work for every address - it may be that smart meters
don't report data via the clearing houses, or some other reason. Maybe
one comparison site is better at querying data from more sources than
another?

Not everyone has a smart meter yet!

[Roland Perry]

Post by Chris Green

Post by Handsome Jack

Post by Theo
All the comparison sites get the data from the same clearing houses (one
for gas[1], one for electric[2]). How they look up or present that data
may vary.

Do you mean that all the comparison sites have access to, and publish, the
energy costs of every [or most] property in the country, like Which seems
to? How and when did that happen?

Well when I tried our road I couldn't find any data, just a request to
enter my consumption and costs.

Same here.

[Andy Burns]

Post by Handsome Jack
hasn't anybody objected to this on data protection grounds?

It's not personal though, is it?
Tied to an address, rather than a person.

[Adrian]

Post by Andy Burns

Post by Handsome Jack
hasn't anybody objected to this on data protection grounds?

It's not personal though, is it?
Tied to an address, rather than a person.

But if that address has a sole occupant ...

Adrian
--
To Reply :
replace "diy" with "news" and reverse the domain

If you are reading this from a web interface eg DIY Banter,
DIY Forum or Google Groups, please be aware this is NOT a forum, and
you are merely using a web portal to a USENET group. Many people block
posters coming from web portals due to perceieved SPAM or inaneness.
For a better method of access, please see:

http://wiki.diyfaq.org.uk/index.php?title=Usenet

[Handsome Jack]

Post by Andy Burns

Post by Handsome Jack
hasn't anybody objected to this on data protection grounds?

It's not personal though, is it?
Tied to an address, rather than a person.

So if the data was, "This address is occupied by several paedophiles", it
would be OK because it's tied to an address rather than a person?

[Andrew]

Post by Andy Burns

Post by Handsome Jack
hasn't anybody objected to this on data protection grounds?

It's not personal though, is it?
Tied to an address, rather than a person.

And you have to enter the existing suppliers and annual usage
so exactly what is the point of it ?.

It doesn't seem to allow you to choose any random address and
see what its energy usage ia.

[Andy Burns]

Post by Andrew

Post by Andy Burns

Post by Handsome Jack
hasn't anybody objected to this on data protection grounds?

It's not personal though, is it?
Tied to an address, rather than a person.

And you have to enter the existing suppliers and annual usage
so exactly what is the point of it ?.

For me it knows the existing supplier and annual usage, it picks
standard variable tariff (my actual tariff is called "Deemed" and is
identical to EDF's standard tariff, I got bumped onto it when
UtilityPoint went bust, I don't think anyone can chose that tariff).

Post by Andrew
It doesn't seem to allow you to choose any random address and
see what its energy usage ia.

I checked a few houses down the street, or for my friends and it seemed
to know?

[Pamela]

Post by Handsome Jack

Post by Theo

Post by John Rumm

Post by alan_m
Buyers can do a web search on the house energy use for the past year -
as mentioned a few weeks back on this newsgroup.

I missed that, have you got a link?

https://energy.which.co.uk/
'compare energy prices'
then enter the address details and click through all the screens
accepting the defaults.
It shows you the recorded annual gas and electric consumption for the
property.

I get to the page
"How do you pay for your energy?
Please select how you pay for your energy"
... Nothing else shows. There is no way of doing it. Pressing
"continue" does nothing.

When I tried the site, I saw only an estimate for my current energy costs.
One of the pages said:

"Your current tariff. Your 'Estimated Annual Energy Costs' are
calculated using your existing unit rate (the pence per kilowatt hour
used) and the daily standing charge (if applicable)."

I'm on smart meters, although the impression I have from this thread is
that the web site data would come from the billing system of the energy
supplier (rather than their meter reading system).

I tried https://energy.which.co.uk/

[Chris Green]

Post by Theo

Post by John Rumm

Post by alan_m

Post by Theo
Basically the overall problem with the EPC is it's trying to do too much
with too little.  Buyers want to know facts like what kind of boiler
there
is, whether the walls are solid or cavity and how much the place will cost
to heat.

Buyers can do a web search on the house energy use for the past year -
as mentioned a few weeks back on this newsgroup.

I missed that, have you got a link?

https://energy.which.co.uk/
'compare energy prices'
then enter the address details and click through all the screens accepting
the defaults.
It shows you the recorded annual gas and electric consumption for the
property.

Not for me it doesn't, it simply asks me how much electricity I use
when I've drilled down through all the entering of who/what/where.

I trieds it once before with the same result, I assumed therefore that
it only holds information that users have entered.

[Nick Finnigan]

Post by Theo

Post by Spike
Some friends of ours are buying a house, and out of interest I looked up
the recommendations of the Environmental Performance Certificate, available
on the .gov web site and quoted below. The house is a two-bedroom
end-of-terrace, with no gas supply.
Who in their right mind is going to spend £4000-£6000 on floor insulation,
which will have a payback period of 40 to 60 years?
Or install solar water heating for a similar cost and payback period?
Cavity wall insulation at 2 to 6 years payback is feasible, as is high heat
retention storage heaters at 2-4 years.
Solar panels at 7 to 10 years is getting to be an outlier.

still on those EPCs. The small 2.5kWp PV, solar water heating and storage
heater recommendation suggests this is a relatively old EPC.

For similar reasons I've looked at the EPC for a terrace house with gas
heaters but not CH. Expiry 2034, solar water heating and 2.5kWp solar
panels at the bottom, longer payback presumably because it is further North.
Does also suggest a condensing boiler rather than ASHP or storage heaters.

[Roland Perry]

Post by Theo
One of the many flaws with EPCs is that the EPC lasts for 10 years, while
the current sensible recommendations can vary, both in cost and
appropriateness. For example, back in the early 2010s biomass boilers and
domestic wind turbines appeared towards the bottom (the 'increasingly
desperate' section). Those technologies haven't panned out, but yet they're
still on those EPCs. The small 2.5kWp PV, solar water heating and storage
heater recommendation suggests this is a relatively old EPC.

My EPC is about five years old, and recommends solar water heating. The
payback period being about 150yrs.

I think the point here is they should refrain from including suggestions
like that, because they are ludicrous, and eventually brings the process
into disrepute.

[The Natural Philosopher]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Theo
One of the many flaws with EPCs is that the EPC lasts for 10 years, while
the current sensible recommendations can vary, both in cost and
appropriateness.  For example, back in the early 2010s biomass boilers
and
domestic wind turbines appeared towards the bottom (the 'increasingly
desperate' section).  Those technologies haven't panned out, but yet
they're
still on those EPCs.  The small 2.5kWp PV, solar water heating and
storage
heater recommendation suggests this is a relatively old EPC.

My EPC is about five years old, and recommends solar water heating. The
payback period being about 150yrs.
I think the point here is they should refrain from including suggestions
like that, because they are ludicrous, and eventually brings the process
into disrepute.

Yup. I could get a better score by mounting solar panels on a thatched
roof...

[#Paul]

Who in their right mind is going to spend ?4000-?6000 on floor insulation,
which will have a payback period of 40 to 60 years?

Someone sick and tired of having extremely cold floors during winter?

#Paul

[The Natural Philosopher]

Post by #Paul

Who in their right mind is going to spend ?4000-?6000 on floor insulation,
which will have a payback period of 40 to 60 years?

Someone sick and tired of having extremely cold floors during winter?
#Paul

Joking aside, when I got to doing heat loss calculations it was quite
surprised to work out how effective 3 meters of earth between the centre
of a house and the outside actually affected heat loss. The far worse
situation is a raised ventilated floor..
If you can, those really are worth insulating.

Also, it is amazing how much nicer 18°C with UFH feels as against 20°C
with radiators.

And that also saves a bit I guess.

Certainly if one has a suspended wooden floor, ripping it up, insulating
it and laying hot water pipes over the insulation is well worth considering

[alan_m]

Post by #Paul

Who in their right mind is going to spend ?4000-?6000 on floor insulation,
which will have a payback period of 40 to 60 years?

Someone sick and tired of having extremely cold floors during winter?
#Paul

Joking aside, when  I got to doing heat loss calculations it was quite
surprised to work out how effective 3 meters of earth between the centre
of a house and the outside actually affected heat loss. The far worse
situation is a raised ventilated floor..
If you can, those really are worth insulating.
Also, it is amazing how much nicer 18°C with UFH feels as  against 20°C
with radiators.
And that also saves a bit I guess.
Certainly if one has a suspended wooden floor, ripping it up, insulating
it and laying hot water pipes over the insulation is well worth considering

How much consideration probably comes down to how disruptive this is if
you are not already planning a a complete carpet replacement

In my case:-
Removing furniture from a room
Removing fitted carpets
Removing a 11mm thick underlay which is in the main stapled down, and in
some places glued.
Removing floor boards. In my experience in a 1908 house the floor boards
were installed with long cut nails and the wood itself somewhat dried
out. There is a 50:50 chance that when removing the boards that they
would split along the grain. In many cases a split could be glued and
clamped together and the board reused but in the past I've had to go to
a proper wood yard and have thicker and wider timber cut down to size to
match existing floor boards.

With a suspended ventilated floor how much insulation would be needed
for UFH. Wouldn't the insulation have to be both under the floor boards
but under the joists to prevent cold bridging?

[The Natural Philosopher]

Post by alan_m

Post by #Paul

Who in their right mind is going to spend ?4000-?6000 on floor insulation,
which will have a payback period of 40 to 60 years?

Someone sick and tired of having extremely cold floors during winter?
#Paul

Joking aside, when  I got to doing heat loss calculations it was quite
surprised to work out how effective 3 meters of earth between the
centre of a house and the outside actually affected heat loss. The far
worse situation is a raised ventilated floor..
If you can, those really are worth insulating.
Also, it is amazing how much nicer 18°C with UFH feels as  against
20°C with radiators.
And that also saves a bit I guess.
Certainly if one has a suspended wooden floor, ripping it up,
insulating it and laying hot water pipes over the insulation is well
worth considering

How much consideration probably comes down to how disruptive this is if
you are not already planning a a complete carpet replacement
In my case:-
Removing furniture from a room
Removing fitted carpets
Removing a 11mm thick underlay which is in the main stapled down, and in
some places glued.
Removing floor boards. In my experience in a 1908 house the floor boards
were installed with long cut nails and the wood itself somewhat dried
out.  There is a 50:50 chance that when removing the boards that they
would split along the grain. In many cases a split could be glued and
clamped together and the board reused but in the past I've had to go to
a proper wood yard and have thicker and wider timber cut down to size to
match existing floor boards.
With a suspended ventilated floor how much insulation would be needed
for UFH. Wouldn't the insulation have to be both under the floor boards
but under the joists to prevent cold bridging?

Yes.
If cold pridging is that impoartnt to you.

More realistically you lift the floor boards and slam celotex between
the joists, foil tape over and add another layer of celotex above the
joists - a thin one - and then replace floor boards or refloor with
flooring grade chip.

Or you could put insulation UNDER the joists, then insulation between,
then UFH pipes above that. If you have decent underfloor access.

[charles]

Post by The Natural Philosopher

Post by alan_m

Post by The Natural Philosopher

Post by #Paul

Who in their right mind is going to spend ?4000-?6000 on floor insulation,
which will have a payback period of 40 to 60 years?

Someone sick and tired of having extremely cold floors during winter?
#Paul

Joking aside, when I got to doing heat loss calculations it was quite
surprised to work out how effective 3 meters of earth between the
centre of a house and the outside actually affected heat loss. The far
worse situation is a raised ventilated floor..
If you can, those really are worth insulating.
Also, it is amazing how much nicer 18°C with UFH feels as against
20°C with radiators.
And that also saves a bit I guess.
Certainly if one has a suspended wooden floor, ripping it up,
insulating it and laying hot water pipes over the insulation is well
worth considering

How much consideration probably comes down to how disruptive this is if
you are not already planning a a complete carpet replacement
In my case:-
Removing furniture from a room
Removing fitted carpets
Removing a 11mm thick underlay which is in the main stapled down, and in
some places glued.
Removing floor boards. In my experience in a 1908 house the floor boards
were installed with long cut nails and the wood itself somewhat dried
out. There is a 50:50 chance that when removing the boards that they
would split along the grain. In many cases a split could be glued and
clamped together and the board reused but in the past I've had to go to
a proper wood yard and have thicker and wider timber cut down to size to
match existing floor boards.
With a suspended ventilated floor how much insulation would be needed
for UFH. Wouldn't the insulation have to be both under the floor boards
but under the joists to prevent cold bridging?

Yes.
If cold pridging is that impoartnt to you.
More realistically you lift the floor boards and slam celotex between
the joists, foil tape over and add another layer of celotex above the
joists - a thin one - and then replace floor boards or refloor with
flooring grade chip.

My floor boards fit underneath the skirting boards. The extra layer of
celotext would lift them. So that the skirting boards would hav eto be
re-fitted - oh - and all the doors would need the bottoms planed off.

Post by The Natural Philosopher
Or you could put insulation UNDER the joists, then insulation between,
then UFH pipes above that. If you have decent underfloor access.
--
T

[RJH]

Post by charles

Post by The Natural Philosopher
More realistically you lift the floor boards and slam celotex between
the joists, foil tape over and add another layer of celotex above the
joists - a thin one - and then replace floor boards or refloor with
flooring grade chip.

My floor boards fit underneath the skirting boards. The extra layer of
celotext would lift them. So that the skirting boards would hav eto be
re-fitted - oh - and all the doors would need the bottoms planed off.

Lifting the floor by even 25mm would be a world of pain. I'd be inclined to
leave it as is, and add some more insulation between the joists. Something I
tried with limited success was stapling some netting to the bottom of the
joists, then infilling with rockwool.

[Andrew]

Post by charles

Post by The Natural Philosopher

Post by alan_m

Post by The Natural Philosopher

Post by #Paul

Who in their right mind is going to spend ?4000-?6000 on floor insulation,
which will have a payback period of 40 to 60 years?

Someone sick and tired of having extremely cold floors during winter?
#Paul

Joking aside, when I got to doing heat loss calculations it was quite
surprised to work out how effective 3 meters of earth between the
centre of a house and the outside actually affected heat loss. The far
worse situation is a raised ventilated floor..
If you can, those really are worth insulating.
Also, it is amazing how much nicer 18°C with UFH feels as against
20°C with radiators.
And that also saves a bit I guess.
Certainly if one has a suspended wooden floor, ripping it up,
insulating it and laying hot water pipes over the insulation is well
worth considering

How much consideration probably comes down to how disruptive this is if
you are not already planning a a complete carpet replacement
In my case:-
Removing furniture from a room
Removing fitted carpets
Removing a 11mm thick underlay which is in the main stapled down, and in
some places glued.
Removing floor boards. In my experience in a 1908 house the floor boards
were installed with long cut nails and the wood itself somewhat dried
out. There is a 50:50 chance that when removing the boards that they
would split along the grain. In many cases a split could be glued and
clamped together and the board reused but in the past I've had to go to
a proper wood yard and have thicker and wider timber cut down to size to
match existing floor boards.
With a suspended ventilated floor how much insulation would be needed
for UFH. Wouldn't the insulation have to be both under the floor boards
but under the joists to prevent cold bridging?

Yes.
If cold pridging is that impoartnt to you.
More realistically you lift the floor boards and slam celotex between
the joists, foil tape over and add another layer of celotex above the
joists - a thin one - and then replace floor boards or refloor with
flooring grade chip.

My floor boards fit underneath the skirting boards. The extra layer of
celotext would lift them. So that the skirting boards would hav eto be
re-fitted - oh - and all the doors would need the bottoms planed off.

Somewhat trivial actually.

[Tim Streater]

Post by charles
My floor boards fit underneath the skirting boards. The extra layer of
celotext would lift them. So that the skirting boards would hav eto be
re-fitted - oh - and all the doors would need the bottoms planed off.

Somewhat trivial actually.

But after which there'd exist a trip-hazard going in or out of each of those
rooms. Who'd buy a house like that?

[Joe]

On 30 Jan 2025 14:39:06 GMT

Post by Tim Streater

Post by charles
My floor boards fit underneath the skirting boards. The extra
layer of celotext would lift them. So that the skirting boards
would hav eto be re-fitted - oh - and all the doors would need the
bottoms planed off.

Somewhat trivial actually.

But after which there'd exist a trip-hazard going in or out of each
of those rooms. Who'd buy a house like that?

You have to do the whole floor, with battens to raise the carpet bars
under the doors. A bit of a problem for the outside doors if upvc.

And while it's easier than rebuilding the house, I wouldn't call it
trivial. All kinds of unexpected niggles will arise.

[Handsome Jack]

Post by The Natural Philosopher
More realistically you lift the floor boards and slam celotex between
the joists, foil tape over and add another layer of celotex above the
joists - a thin one - and then replace floor boards or refloor with
flooring grade chip.
Or you could put insulation UNDER the joists, then insulation between,
then UFH pipes above that. If you have decent underfloor access.

Could you not just put 100mm celotex between the joists, under the
floorboards, so you don't have to do any woodwork? What bad things might
happen?

[Spike]

Post by #Paul

Who in their right mind is going to spend ?4000-?6000 on floor insulation,
which will have a payback period of 40 to 60 years?

Someone sick and tired of having extremely cold floors during winter?

Quality underlay and carpet would be a lot cheaper, and be aesthetically
pleasing.

[Andy Burns]

Post by #Paul

Post by Spike

Who in their right mind is going to spend ?4000-?6000 on floor insulation,

which will have a payback period of 40 to 60 years?

Someone sick and tired of having extremely cold floors during winter?

Sheepskin slippers are cheap.

[Andrew]

Post by Spike

Post by #Paul

Post by Spike

Who in their right mind is going to spend ?4000-?6000 on floor

insulation,

Post by #Paul

Post by Spike
which will have a payback period of 40 to 60 years?

Someone sick and tired of having extremely cold floors during winter?

Sheepskin slippers are cheap.

https://www.marksandspencer.com/borg-slipper-boots-with-freshfeet/p/clp60687926

[Andrew]

Post by #Paul

Who in their right mind is going to spend ?4000-?6000 on floor insulation,
which will have a payback period of 40 to 60 years?

Someone sick and tired of having extremely cold floors during winter?
#Paul

And someone who realizes that every pound spent will add two
pounds to the value of the property, and unlike solar, batteries,
pumps, etc, this is a one-off investment that will not have to be
re-done every 10 years or so (unless you live in a flood-prone
area, in which case DON'T)

[The Natural Philosopher]

Post by Andrew

Post by #Paul

Who in their right mind is going to spend ?4000-?6000 on floor insulation,
which will have a payback period of 40 to 60 years?

Someone sick and tired of having extremely cold floors during winter?
#Paul

And someone who realizes that every pound spent will add two
pounds to the value of the property, and unlike solar, batteries,
pumps, etc, this is a one-off investment that will not have to be
re-done every 10 years or so (unless you live in a flood-prone
area, in which case DON'T)

I don't believe that insulation affects property values much - at least
not at the upper end...

Having a lockable garage to park the Range Rover in saves a lot on
insurance, and a pony paddock at the back saves on pony nuts...

[Andrew]

Post by The Natural Philosopher

Post by Andrew

Post by #Paul

Who in their right mind is going to spend ?4000-?6000 on floor insulation,
which will have a payback period of 40 to 60 years?

Someone sick and tired of having extremely cold floors during winter?
#Paul

And someone who realizes that every pound spent will add two
pounds to the value of the property, and unlike solar, batteries,
pumps, etc, this is a one-off investment that will not have to be
re-done every 10 years or so (unless you live in a flood-prone
area, in which case DON'T)

I don't believe that insulation affects property values much - at least
not at the upper end...
Having a lockable garage to park the Range Rover in saves a lot on
insurance, and a pony paddock at the back saves on pony nuts...

I don't think those categories of home owners give a flying
duck about their energy bills OR the planet :-(

[Tim Streater]

Post by Andrew

Post by The Natural Philosopher

Post by Andrew

Post by #Paul

Who in their right mind is going to spend ?4000-?6000 on floor insulation,
which will have a payback period of 40 to 60 years?

Someone sick and tired of having extremely cold floors during winter?

And someone who realizes that every pound spent will add two
pounds to the value of the property, and unlike solar, batteries,
pumps, etc, this is a one-off investment that will not have to be
re-done every 10 years or so (unless you live in a flood-prone
area, in which case DON'T)

I don't believe that insulation affects property values much - at least
not at the upper end...
Having a lockable garage to park the Range Rover in saves a lot on
insurance, and a pony paddock at the back saves on pony nuts...

I don't think those categories of home owners give a flying
duck about their energy bills OR the planet :-(

About the ULV owners, I would agree. For the rest, you have no evidence.

[The Natural Philosopher]

Post by Tim Streater

Post by Andrew

Post by The Natural Philosopher

Post by Andrew

Post by #Paul

Who in their right mind is going to spend ?4000-?6000 on floor insulation,
which will have a payback period of 40 to 60 years?

Someone sick and tired of having extremely cold floors during winter?

And someone who realizes that every pound spent will add two
pounds to the value of the property, and unlike solar, batteries,
pumps, etc, this is a one-off investment that will not have to be
re-done every 10 years or so (unless you live in a flood-prone
area, in which case DON'T)

I don't believe that insulation affects property values much - at least
not at the upper end...
Having a lockable garage to park the Range Rover in saves a lot on
insurance, and a pony paddock at the back saves on pony nuts...

I don't think those categories of home owners give a flying
duck about their energy bills OR the planet :-(

About the ULV owners, I would agree. For the rest, you have no evidence.

WTF is ULV?

[Tim Streater]

On 30 Jan 2025 at 22:54:02 GMT, "The Natural Philosopher"

Post by The Natural Philosopher

Post by Tim Streater

Post by Andrew

Post by The Natural Philosopher

Post by Andrew

Post by #Paul

Who in their right mind is going to spend ?4000-?6000 on floor insulation,
which will have a payback period of 40 to 60 years?

Someone sick and tired of having extremely cold floors during winter?

And someone who realizes that every pound spent will add two
pounds to the value of the property, and unlike solar, batteries,
pumps, etc, this is a one-off investment that will not have to be
re-done every 10 years or so (unless you live in a flood-prone
area, in which case DON'T)

I don't believe that insulation affects property values much - at least
not at the upper end...
Having a lockable garage to park the Range Rover in saves a lot on
insurance, and a pony paddock at the back saves on pony nuts...

I don't think those categories of home owners give a flying
duck about their energy bills OR the planet :-(

About the ULV owners, I would agree. For the rest, you have no evidence.

WTF is ULV?

Unnecessarily Large Vehicle. Something that is a pain on these narrow, often
sunken, Kent lanes.

[The Natural Philosopher]

Post by Andrew

Post by The Natural Philosopher

Post by Andrew

Post by #Paul

Who in their right mind is going to spend ?4000-?6000 on floor insulation,
which will have a payback period of 40 to 60 years?

Someone sick and tired of having extremely cold floors during winter?
#Paul

And someone who realizes that every pound spent will add two
pounds to the value of the property, and unlike solar, batteries,
pumps, etc, this is a one-off investment that will not have to be
re-done every 10 years or so (unless you live in a flood-prone
area, in which case DON'T)

I don't believe that insulation affects property values much - at
least not at the upper end...
Having a lockable garage to park the Range Rover in saves a lot on
insurance, and a pony paddock at the back saves on pony nuts...

I don't think those categories of home owners give a flying
duck about their energy bills OR the planet :-(

Nether does Kevin in his semi in Chelmsford.

In fact the only people who do care are the intellectual snobs who think
they know where it's at because they heard it on the BBC or read it in
the guardian

[TimW]

Post by Spike
Some friends of ours are buying a house, and out of interest I looked up
the recommendations of the Environmental Performance Certificate, available
on the .gov web site and quoted below. The house is a two-bedroom
end-of-terrace, with no gas supply.
Who in their right mind is going to spend £4000-£6000 on floor insulation,
which will have a payback period of 40 to 60 years?
Or install solar water heating for a similar cost and payback period?
Cavity wall insulation at 2 to 6 years payback is feasible, as is high heat
retention storage heaters at 2-4 years.
Solar panels at 7 to 10 years is getting to be an outlier.
Star saving and payback is improvement of the hot water tank insulation,
payback in 6 to 12 weeks.
This whole charade seems predicated on impelling people to put money into
the solar rip-off industry, for no real benefit to the owners.
If this was my house, I’d insulate the hot water tank, and think about CWI,
being aware of the issues surrounding that, and put in the storage heaters,
for a cost of 4K. I’d then invest the £17k saved, the interest paying for
the ‘losses’ of not installing the floor insulation and solar fancies.

Of course it's much cheaper in the short term if we all just burn the
planet down.

TW

[Spike]

Post by TimW

Post by Spike
Some friends of ours are buying a house, and out of interest I looked up
the recommendations of the Environmental Performance Certificate, available
on the .gov web site and quoted below. The house is a two-bedroom
end-of-terrace, with no gas supply.
Who in their right mind is going to spend £4000-£6000 on floor insulation,
which will have a payback period of 40 to 60 years?
Or install solar water heating for a similar cost and payback period?
Cavity wall insulation at 2 to 6 years payback is feasible, as is high heat
retention storage heaters at 2-4 years.
Solar panels at 7 to 10 years is getting to be an outlier.
Star saving and payback is improvement of the hot water tank insulation,
payback in 6 to 12 weeks.
This whole charade seems predicated on impelling people to put money into
the solar rip-off industry, for no real benefit to the owners.
If this was my house, I’d insulate the hot water tank, and think about CWI,
being aware of the issues surrounding that, and put in the storage heaters,
for a cost of 4K. I’d then invest the £17k saved, the interest paying for
the ‘losses’ of not installing the floor insulation and solar fancies.

Of course it's much cheaper in the short term if we all just burn the
planet down.
TW

To stop that happening we’ll have to circularise the Earths’s orbit,
correct its axial tilt, even out the cosmic ray flux, and regularise the
Sun’s output.

Good luck with that.

[Tim Streater]

Post by Spike

Post by TimW

Post by Spike
Some friends of ours are buying a house, and out of interest I looked up
the recommendations of the Environmental Performance Certificate, available
on the .gov web site and quoted below. The house is a two-bedroom
end-of-terrace, with no gas supply.
Who in their right mind is going to spend £4000-£6000 on floor insulation,
which will have a payback period of 40 to 60 years?

[snip]

Post by Spike

Post by TimW

Post by Spike
If this was my house, I’d insulate the hot water tank, and think about CWI,
being aware of the issues surrounding that, and put in the storage heaters,
for a cost of 4K. I’d then invest the £17k saved, the interest paying for
the ‘losses’ of not installing the floor insulation and solar fancies.

Of course it's much cheaper in the short term if we all just burn the
planet down.

To stop that happening we’ll have to circularise the Earths’s orbit,

It prolly wouldn't stay circular. Jupiter and Saturn would see to that.

Post by Spike
correct its axial tilt

If you mean "reduce to 0 from 23 degrees or so" then there'd be no more
seasons. And when the tides have caused the Moon's orbit to increase so much
that it ceases to be gravitationally bound to the Earth, and wanders off into
space, the tilt of the axis will become chaotic due to influence of the likes
of Jupiter.

Post by Spike
even out the cosmic ray flux, and regularise the Sun’s output.

The Sun does produce 40% more energy than when it was young. Not sure why this
is, but although the Earth and its ecosystems are Daisyworld writ large, as
the Daisyworld simulations demonstrate, there will come a point when the
natural negative feedback of the Earth's climate will not cope with increasing
heat from the Sun. At that point all the daisies die, and so will life on
Earth.

I doubt if that is the situation now; there have been times in geological
history when the atmospheric CO2 concentration was much higher than today -
and I'm not talking about pre-life. 500 million years ago it was 4000ppm
(eight or ten times today).

You don't want it too low anyway; too low and photosynthesis stops.

[Andrew]

Post by TimW

Post by Spike
Some friends of ours are buying a house, and out of interest I looked up
the recommendations of the Environmental Performance Certificate, available
on the .gov web site and quoted below. The house is a two-bedroom
end-of-terrace, with no gas supply.
Who in their right mind is going to spend £4000-£6000 on floor insulation,
which will have a payback period of 40 to 60 years?
Or install solar water heating for a similar cost and payback period?
Cavity wall insulation at 2 to 6 years payback is feasible, as is high heat
retention storage heaters at 2-4 years.
Solar panels at 7 to 10 years is getting to be an outlier.
Star saving and payback is improvement of the hot water tank insulation,
payback in 6 to 12 weeks.
This whole charade seems predicated on impelling people to put money into
the solar rip-off industry, for no real benefit to the owners.
If this was my house, I’d insulate the hot water tank, and think about CWI,
being aware of the issues surrounding that, and put in the storage heaters,
for a cost of 4K. I’d then invest the £17k saved, the interest paying for
the ‘losses’ of not installing the floor insulation and solar fancies.

Of course it's much cheaper in the short term if we all just burn the
planet down.
TW

But easier if women stopped having so many bloody kids.

No oil = NO NHS (go and work out how much single use
plastic the NHS uses every year. It's mind boggling).