help us by a power station !!

[Phil Pascoe]

Has Windscale, three mile island, Chernobyl or Fukishima not clearly highlighted the potential hazards that nuclear can create, and many are still suffering from to this day ...

I can't speak for the first two, but from what I've read the latter two were preventable.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

I do wonder whether there are cheaper solutions which could be applied to most properties, not just those with the right orientation and roof space:

• simple reduction of drafts, sealing cracks etc
• mandatory replacement of non-LED lighting
• VAT zero rated thermal vests and long johns (possibly not a joke!!)
• timers - workshop fan heater automatically switches off after 20 mins
• easily installed insulation - carpet underlay on concrete floors, full loft insulation
• improved glazing - low emissivity glass, double glazing to replace single glazing etc

(1) in many instances would lead to endless problems with damp.
Short of inspecting every property how would we comply with (2)? That's a bit nanny state.
Good luck insulating under my carpets - I have none.


I have said for the last forty years that all new builds and commercial properties should have solar panels of some type by law. The price would have dropped dramatically if done on that scale and we wouldn't have 100,000s of acres of solar panels on farm land.
The rights and wrongs of energy usage aside, every government and energy minister in the last four or five decades should hang their heads in shame - anyone with half a brain could foresee the oncoming shortages that long ago.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

It was several years ago admittedly, but last I researched solar panels in detail to have enough to be worth worrying about on my house thay would have had a 115 year payback time. My friend however after 16 or 17 years (iirc) is still getting something like 41p per kwh from his feed in tariff. His panels cost him £15,000 and thanks to us they paid for themselves a few years ago.

 

[Jacob]

We have lived in a flat in the city centre for almost 25 years. It's a warehouse conversion managed by a housing association - it was the only way we could live in the city back then - but it has appalling heat retention. It doesn't have a cavity wall or insulation. ........... Welcome to 21st century social housing!

Small correction; welcome to 21st century free market housing with minimal regulation following years of government failure to deal with the issues.
The tragedy is that housing issues are relatively easy to fix. Particularly in your case, where "warehouse conversion" implies plenty of room for relatively cheap insulation on all internal surfaces, with very low heat losses approaching zero space heat requirement.
This is not failed government policy - it's current policy in action, red in tooth and claw.
The big question to ask is why is it government policy to not deal with housing issues?

 

[Sachakins]

@Sachakins That still doesn't address the issue of housing stock that is not predominatly 'South facing'

New panels are less affected by not being true south, but yes I agree, hence why I said
" It won't be 100% solution, and those that can't benefit, ie conservation area, flats, unsuitable structures etc could be targeted in other ways."

What those ways are I don't know, but at least starting my sort of scheme would surely help.

 

[thetyreman]

[Q

Has Windscale, three mile island, Chernobyl or Fukishima not clearly highlighted the potential hazards that nuclear can create, and many are still suffering from to this day. Then you also have the huge amounts of radioactive waste that need to be babysat, it takes Uranium 4.5 billion years to become lead and during this process it becomes Polonium for a duration, yes the stuff that killed Alexander Litvinenko. So nuclear is never "safe" it is not controlled but only managed and then only until something goes wrong and you have a global event.

no denying it's dangerous, I've not once said it is safe, nothing is without risk.

 

[J-G]

New panels are less affected by not being true south, ...

That's not what I read in the latest advice I can find with a quick 'Google' - which still states that 'direct South' is the 'ideal'.

Your idea may be a good starting point but the problem is by no means simplistic - re-directing allocated funds away from 'Smart Meters' could be useful but a whole lot more research needs doing.

 

[Persephone]

Small correction; welcome to 21st century free market housing with minimal regulation following years of government failure to deal with the issues.
The tragedy is that housing issues are relatively easy to fix. Particularly in your case, where "warehouse conversion" implies plenty of room for relatively cheap insulation on all internal surfaces, with very low heat losses approaching zero space heat requirement.
This is not failed government policy - it's current policy in action, red in tooth and claw.
The big question to ask is why is it government policy to not deal with housing issues?

The building was converted to flats in 1989 from an office and warehouse building built in 1907. I understand that at the time Northern Counties Housing Association acquired it for £1. They clearly did the conversion on the cheap - which would have been the result of poor funding from Margaret Thatcher's government - as they simply fitted plaster board over the external-facing walls and fitted lower internal ceilings. The loose fitting sash windows were not draught sealed. No insulation was added between the plaster board and external walls. Fixtures like bathrooms were clearly job lots of auction clearances - our bathroom suite was a delightful avocado green for many years and a neighbour had a burgundy suite reminiscent of something from a brothel in a 70s movie.
The rent here was always relatively high for the size of the apartment - and they crammed in as many tiny apartments as they could get away with - but you pay for location and an M1 postcode was quite desirable back in the late 90s. However, for much of the time very little was done to maintain the building (including throughout the Blair/Brown governments) and ultimately the building was sold to the Guinness Partnership. (If anybody is tempted to rent a property from the Guinness Partnership make sure you know all the clauses in the tenancy first.)
The Guinness Partnership did nothing to maintain the property. For a central location in a listed building with high rents we would often come home to find the elevators not working and at one point during lockdown it was out for three weeks and some elderly/disabled residents were unable to leave their flats.
However, because of Grenfell the government seems to have thrown lots of money at certain sectors of social housing as for two years the building has been clad in scaffolding and the sunlight blocked out while a private contractor (rarely seen) supposedly repairs the roof. If only the money could be put towards replacing the barely functioning plumbing and employing a team of plumbers who could come out to a blockage (and solve the problem) within seven days. A functional heating system would also be beneficial.
Anyway I digress. Yes you are correct that this conversion could have been done much better. I guess if they were doing it now they'd fit a vapour barrier and celotex insulation between the exterior walls and the plaster board. The plumbing would be functional and the heating would be more efficient. My post was to comment on the current state of much of Britain's social housing. It could be upgraded but for buildings like this you would probably have to temporarily re-home all the tenants and gut it.
A thing I did not mention about this building, and one of the reasons we decided it was time to go is that Manchester City Council took control of who could live here. What was once a building tenanted by bohemian types, urban professionals (young and old) and many LGBT people who wanted to be close to the gay village has become a building filled more and more with drug addicts (functional or otherwise), refugees and asylum seekers. I have no problem with these groups of people but when concentrated in a building that barely functions because of poor construction it becomes somewhat unpleasant. And whoever thought it would be a good idea to place groups of people with very conservative religious beliefs in a building with a large LGBT population should be forced to stand between them in the elevator and observe the hatred and comments directed towards the LGBT people from those refugees and asylum seekers. And don't get me started on the number of times the refugees upstairs have flooded my apartment then refused to answer the door.
But anyway I've digressed again and now sound like a presenter from GB News. I am not that person, I am someone who has been placed in an impossible situation by the failure of the housing association to properly maintain the building and the local council who don't care about communities. I am, however, more fortunate than many of my fellow tenants in that I have substantial savings and a house to move into that I can insulate and maintain myself. I only wish it didn't have a gable end roof and was on a North-South axis so I could fit solar panels. Perhaps a wind turbine in the garden is an idea? Actually, thinking about the garden, subsidised ground source heat pumps would be a good start.

 

[Sachakins]

That's not what I read in the latest advice I can find with a quick 'Google' - which still states that 'direct South' is the 'ideal'.

Your idea may be a good starting point but the problem is by no means simplistic - re-directing allocated funds away from 'Smart Meters' could be useful but a whole lot more research needs doing.

Yes "The ideal is south", but they still work at some angles to direct south.

 

[Spectric]

Having fixed panels is your problem, but there are ways round this.

1) Motorised panels to deliver best elevation for the time of day.
2) Fixed panels but have a motorised reflector that can direct more of the sun onto your panels.
3) Put the panels where they can all be rotated to follow both the direction and elevation of the sun, should only need about 180° so no full turns.

 

[Adam W.]

And while we're all being pushed towards electric vehicles how are we going to afford to power them when electricity prices overtake diesel?

The Danes are having a bit of an issue with their electricity infrastructure, because it can't cope with the sudden demand placed on it by the switch to electricity powered air/ground source heat pumps and car charging.

 

[Jacob]

The building was converted to flats in 1989 from an office and warehouse building built in 1907. I understand that at the time Northern Counties Housing Association acquired it for £1. They clearly did the conversion on the cheap - which would have been the result of poor funding from Margaret Thatcher's government - as they simply fitted plaster board over the external-facing walls and fitted lower internal ceilings. The loose fitting sash windows were not draught sealed. No insulation was added between the plaster board and external walls. Fixtures like bathrooms were clearly job lots of auction clearances - our bathroom suite was a delightful avocado green for many years and a neighbour had a burgundy suite reminiscent of something from a brothel in a 70s movie.
The rent here was always relatively high for the size of the apartment - and they crammed in as many tiny apartments as they could get away with - but you pay for location and an M1 postcode was quite desirable back in the late 90s. However, for much of the time very little was done to maintain the building (including throughout the Blair/Brown governments) and ultimately the building was sold to the Guinness Partnership. (If anybody is tempted to rent a property from the Guinness Partnership make sure you know all the clauses in the tenancy first.)
The Guinness Partnership did nothing to maintain the property. For a central location in a listed building with high rents we would often come home to find the elevators not working and at one point during lockdown it was out for three weeks and some elderly/disabled residents were unable to leave their flats.
However, because of Grenfell the government seems to have thrown lots of money at certain sectors of social housing as for two years the building has been clad in scaffolding and the sunlight blocked out while a private contractor (rarely seen) supposedly repairs the roof. If only the money could be put towards replacing the barely functioning plumbing and employing a team of plumbers who could come out to a blockage (and solve the problem) within seven days. A functional heating system would also be beneficial.
Anyway I digress. Yes you are correct that this conversion could have been done much better. I guess if they were doing it now they'd fit a vapour barrier and celotex insulation between the exterior walls and the plaster board. The plumbing would be functional and the heating would be more efficient. My post was to comment on the current state of much of Britain's social housing. It could be upgraded but for buildings like this you would probably have to temporarily re-home all the tenants and gut it.
A thing I did not mention about this building, and one of the reasons we decided it was time to go is that Manchester City Council took control of who could live here. What was once a building tenanted by bohemian types, urban professionals (young and old) and many LGBT people who wanted to be close to the gay village has become a building filled more and more with drug addicts (functional or otherwise), refugees and asylum seekers. I have no problem with these groups of people but when concentrated in a building that barely functions because of poor construction it becomes somewhat unpleasant. And whoever thought it would be a good idea to place groups of people with very conservative religious beliefs in a building with a large LGBT population should be forced to stand between them in the elevator and observe the hatred and comments directed towards the LGBT people from those refugees and asylum seekers. And don't get me started on the number of times the refugees upstairs have flooded my apartment then refused to answer the door.
But anyway I've digressed again and now sound like a presenter from GB News. I am not that person, I am someone who has been placed in an impossible situation by the failure of the housing association to properly maintain the building and the local council who don't care about communities. I am, however, more fortunate than many of my fellow tenants in that I have substantial savings and a house to move into that I can insulate and maintain myself. I only wish it didn't have a gable end roof and was on a North-South axis so I could fit solar panels. Perhaps a wind turbine in the garden is an idea? Actually, thinking about the garden, subsidised ground source heat pumps would be a good start.

Strongly argued below that that poor housing policy is the primary cause of poor housing (obviously, but has to be pointed out too often) but also of most of the social problems associated:
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2...-could-fixing-housing-fix-everything-else-tooCouncil house sell off started this - least desirable housing stayed rental - the mixed communities who used to live there were filtered so that poorer families remained - responsibility for their welfare was devolved, weakly regulated to inefficient Housing Associations - supply further reduced by low levels of council house building and problems thereby increased.
A perfect storm!

 

[joethedrummer]

,, just a few real life figures,, had solar panels fitted about nine and a half years ago, split 9 panels facing east and 7 facing west on a shallow (18 degree) roof for a,bout £6500, had about that in payments, and reduced the electricity drawn in that time by about £2000, just had to move things about like using appliances whilst producing and not altogether, which became easier upon retirement,,

 

[J-G]

Yes "The ideal is south", but they still work at some angles to direct south.

'twas ever thus! - 11 of mine are in fact 49° SW which gives them 93% efficiency and 5 are 41° SE with 94.3% efficiency. More of an issue is a beautiful Silver Birch which at times shades the 5 panels by up to 14% but I would rather have the tree than gain that little bit!

 

[heimlaga]

From the very blurred wiew I can get through binoculars from the other side of Europe I am not quite set up to draw far reaching conclusions concerning British politics.
Hovewer there is one thing that strikes me. A total lack of either will or ability to deal with systematic flaws.
Housing and energy consumption and energy supply and social issues. All are interwined with one caused by another and causing a third.

I have no intent to be an international besserwisser telling you how to solve the problems. Because I cannot. I just wish people in many contries including both Britain and Finland would stop throwing horse manure at one another and start building a new functional system instead. And hopefully have it well on the way when our present fossil fuel based system falls apart.
What is presently done to remedy the problem is akin to nailing a few lead patches onto the City of Adelaide to make her seaworthy for a trip around the world.

We must all increase self sufficiency, reduce the need for fossil fuels, reduce consumption of natural resources and rebuild the ecosystem both on sea and on land so that it produces more harvestable resources than the depleted ecosystem of today. Rebuild forests to get sustainable timber. Rebuild rivers to get salmon to eat. Rebuild cod stocks in the North Sea. Rebuild nutrient depleted soils. Reduce the need for long distance transport. All this without creating rifts in society. All while building a new energy supply from renewable resources.

 

[woodieallen]

From the very blurred wiew I can get through binoculars from the other side of Europe I am not quite set up to draw far reaching conclusions concerning British politics.
Hovewer there is one thing that strikes me. A total lack of either will or ability to deal with systematic flaws.
Housing and energy consumption and energy supply and social issues. All are interwined with one caused by another and causing a third.

I have no intent to be an international besserwisser telling you how to solve the problems. Because I cannot. I just wish people in many contries including both Britain and Finland would stop throwing horse manure at one another and start building a new functional system instead. And hopefully have it well on the way when our present fossil fuel based system falls apart.
What is presently done to remedy the problem is akin to nailing a few lead patches onto the City of Adelaide to make her seaworthy for a trip around the world.

We must all increase self sufficiency, reduce the need for fossil fuels, reduce consumption of natural resources and rebuild the ecosystem both on sea and on land so that it produces more harvestable resources than the depleted ecosystem of today. Rebuild forests to get sustainable timber. Rebuild rivers to get salmon to eat. Rebuild cod stocks in the North Sea. Rebuild nutrient depleted soils. Reduce the need for long distance transport. All this without creating rifts in society. All while building a new energy supply from renewable resources.

And limit the number of children per family. Too many people for this planet to support.

 

[Ollie78]

From the very blurred wiew I can get through binoculars from the other side of Europe I am not quite set up to draw far reaching conclusions concerning British politics.

I can give you the perspective from here.
It`s a complete farce on a scale so vast it is actually hard to believe it`s realy happening in front of our very eyes.

Ollie

 

[Phil Pascoe]

And limit the number of children per family. Too many people for this planet to support.

In most Countries (certainly the first world ones) the main reason the population is increasing is people living a lot longer, not the birthrate going up. A few African Countries being noticeable exceptions.

 

[Jacob]

From the very blurred wiew I can get through binoculars from the other side of Europe I am not quite set up to draw far reaching conclusions concerning British politics.
Hovewer there is one thing that strikes me. A total lack of either will or ability to deal with systematic flaws.

Spot on 100%. .
It's not inability - most broad based issues are relatively simple.
It's not systemic failures.
It's much worse than either - it's an ideological commitment to doing nothing, or as little as possible based on a crackpot ideology of "free markets" ultimately serving everybodies needs; a.k.a. "neoliberalism".
It's easy to see who are the main proponents of this nonsense and no coincidence that they are the main beneficiaries - and it's not 'the working man'

..........

I have no intent to be an international besserwisser telling you how to solve the problems. Because I cannot. ......

Free free, don't underestimate yourself, you could as well as the various idiots we now have in power!!

 

[Droogs]

In most Countries (certainly the first world ones) the main reason the population is increasing is people living a lot longer, not the birthrate going up. A few African Countries being noticeable exceptions.

On that subject have a watch of this, it gets very interesting after the first minute or so