No gas boilers in new homes after 2025.
Discussion
Meanwhile in India...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-468372...
"The Indian government launched a flagship scheme in 2016 to eliminate the indoor pollution generated by using kerosene, wood and cow dung on cooking stoves by encouraging the use of cleaner fuel.
This scheme involved supplying of bottled cooking gas to tens of millions of rural households across the country."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-468372...
"The Indian government launched a flagship scheme in 2016 to eliminate the indoor pollution generated by using kerosene, wood and cow dung on cooking stoves by encouraging the use of cleaner fuel.
This scheme involved supplying of bottled cooking gas to tens of millions of rural households across the country."
brman said:
AJL308 said:
Several years ago I heard about a boiler which used what was essentially a microwave oven to heat water rather than gas. It was massively more efficient than gas and would cost pennies per day to run and had next to no moving or wear parts so they were cheap to buy an install. They were going to be made in mongolia or somewhere unusual like that or something.
Unsurprisingly they disappeared from the market so the patents were most likely bought up by BP or something so that they'd never see the light of day.
It would be interesting to see if these resurface over the next few years and who actually starts making them.
Why would you use electricity to heat water to heat the house? Why not just use electric heaters? You cannot get any more efficient than an electric heater...... Unsurprisingly they disappeared from the market so the patents were most likely bought up by BP or something so that they'd never see the light of day.
It would be interesting to see if these resurface over the next few years and who actually starts making them.
Plus an normal electric water heater is massively more efficient than a microwave oven so that bit does not make sense either.
I suspect the reason you have not heard of this idea since is because it doesn't make sense, not because of some grand conspiracy.
Heat pumps are effectively greater than 100% efficient due to the heat output being significantly greater then the electrical energy consumed. Before anyone says that's impossible, they are heat pumps. so are extracting energy (heat) from the atmosphere (or ground) and moving into the home.
Hosenbugler said:
abzmike said:
And that’s the point. At the moment solutions other than gas boilers are not mainstream by any means, and things like ground source heat pumps useless for all but homes that have access to open land. For the Chancellor to stand up today and say boilers in new homes will be outlawed in 5 years is absurd.
Entirely agree, more bats
t eco nonsense from clueless politicians. The same happened over condensing boilers, legislated on them before the technology was proven. They saved on fuel ok, did not work half the time, installers I knew back then, were tearing their hair out , could not recomend a specific model, as they all broke quickly. Crackers. As for heatpumps, expensive, costly to install, horrifically complex, as they stand, just not practical. Fact remains gas heating is efficient, reliable, cost effective , removal of it from the market is plain absurd, an equall quality alternative is needed before they are phased out (if they are) not after.
its a pump, a valve and a couple of coils.
Then again heat pumps have to be run continuously, they aren't suitable for the concept of heating the house in the morning, off all day, firing up for the evening stint, and off overnight.
Therefore folks who are out all day would be heating premises that were empty, and when we looked at this on a potential buy already kitted out with ASHP it just didn't make economic sense unless you factored in the government grants, which aren't going to be there forever surely.
Therefore folks who are out all day would be heating premises that were empty, and when we looked at this on a potential buy already kitted out with ASHP it just didn't make economic sense unless you factored in the government grants, which aren't going to be there forever surely.
Why should new houses built after 2025 require any heating at all excepting HWS requirement? They would require heat recovery ventilation but as kitchens and bathrooms are mechanically vented anyway this will be very economic to provide.
Huge plus: no radiators in habitable rooms.
Many areas do not have gas supplies. I would suggest that local energy centres and power stations are the way forward.
All new properties should have solar panels to provide base HWS heating.
Heat pumps can be air source or ground source and bore holes ar inexpensive now in many areas.
Huge plus: no radiators in habitable rooms.
Many areas do not have gas supplies. I would suggest that local energy centres and power stations are the way forward.
All new properties should have solar panels to provide base HWS heating.
Heat pumps can be air source or ground source and bore holes ar inexpensive now in many areas.
Plymo said:
Meanwhile in India...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-468372...
"The Indian government launched a flagship scheme in 2016 to eliminate the indoor pollution generated by using kerosene, wood and cow dung on cooking stoves by encouraging the use of cleaner fuel.
This scheme involved supplying of bottled cooking gas to tens of millions of rural households across the country."
Oh that's ok ,india has a different atmosphere to us or sumfing.https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-468372...
"The Indian government launched a flagship scheme in 2016 to eliminate the indoor pollution generated by using kerosene, wood and cow dung on cooking stoves by encouraging the use of cleaner fuel.
This scheme involved supplying of bottled cooking gas to tens of millions of rural households across the country."
98elise said:
Electric heating is 100% efficient based in the electrical energy it consumes, but not as efficient as a heat pump.
Heat pumps are effectively greater than 100% efficient due to the heat output being significantly greater then the electrical energy consumed. Before anyone says that's impossible, they are heat pumps. so are extracting energy (heat) from the atmosphere (or ground) and moving into the home.
Does that include the large amount of fossil fuel that was probably used to manufacture said heat pump?Heat pumps are effectively greater than 100% efficient due to the heat output being significantly greater then the electrical energy consumed. Before anyone says that's impossible, they are heat pumps. so are extracting energy (heat) from the atmosphere (or ground) and moving into the home.
garagewidow said:
98elise said:
Electric heating is 100% efficient based in the electrical energy it consumes, but not as efficient as a heat pump.
Heat pumps are effectively greater than 100% efficient due to the heat output being significantly greater then the electrical energy consumed. Before anyone says that's impossible, they are heat pumps. so are extracting energy (heat) from the atmosphere (or ground) and moving into the home.
Does that include the large amount of fossil fuel that was probably used to manufacture said heat pump?Heat pumps are effectively greater than 100% efficient due to the heat output being significantly greater then the electrical energy consumed. Before anyone says that's impossible, they are heat pumps. so are extracting energy (heat) from the atmosphere (or ground) and moving into the home.
Netherlands have already started a gas phase out.
No new homes can be linked to the gas grid.
Stopping gas production in the Groningen gas field (the largest in Europe) by 2030, in part to reduce emissions, but also to reduce earthquakes.
Also plans to possibly disconnect 170000 houses per year from the grid.
I am not saying this is a good idea because the Dutch are doing it, but it isn't a far out crazy idea that one British Politician thought of and just ran with it.
No new homes can be linked to the gas grid.
Stopping gas production in the Groningen gas field (the largest in Europe) by 2030, in part to reduce emissions, but also to reduce earthquakes.
Also plans to possibly disconnect 170000 houses per year from the grid.
I am not saying this is a good idea because the Dutch are doing it, but it isn't a far out crazy idea that one British Politician thought of and just ran with it.
Nickgnome said:
garagewidow said:
98elise said:
Electric heating is 100% efficient based in the electrical energy it consumes, but not as efficient as a heat pump.
Heat pumps are effectively greater than 100% efficient due to the heat output being significantly greater then the electrical energy consumed. Before anyone says that's impossible, they are heat pumps. so are extracting energy (heat) from the atmosphere (or ground) and moving into the home.
Does that include the large amount of fossil fuel that was probably used to manufacture said heat pump?Heat pumps are effectively greater than 100% efficient due to the heat output being significantly greater then the electrical energy consumed. Before anyone says that's impossible, they are heat pumps. so are extracting energy (heat) from the atmosphere (or ground) and moving into the home.
Referring to the OP,is the aim to help mr and mrs smith save a few quid a year or as I suspect more to do with CC.
Adeyfisher said:
Netherlands have already started a gas phase out.
No new homes can be linked to the gas grid.
Stopping gas production in the Groningen gas field (the largest in Europe) by 2030, in part to reduce emissions, but also to reduce earthquakes.
Also plans to possibly disconnect 170000 houses per year from the grid.
I am not saying this is a good idea because the Dutch are doing it, but it isn't a far out crazy idea that one British Politician thought of and just ran with it.
I think simplifying energy distribution nationwide has to be a good thing. Car forum peeps should be over the moon that roads will not need to be excavated so often.No new homes can be linked to the gas grid.
Stopping gas production in the Groningen gas field (the largest in Europe) by 2030, in part to reduce emissions, but also to reduce earthquakes.
Also plans to possibly disconnect 170000 houses per year from the grid.
I am not saying this is a good idea because the Dutch are doing it, but it isn't a far out crazy idea that one British Politician thought of and just ran with it.
We are converts now to the Induction hob as its far superior to the previous gas one.
garagewidow said:
Nickgnome said:
garagewidow said:
98elise said:
Electric heating is 100% efficient based in the electrical energy it consumes, but not as efficient as a heat pump.
Heat pumps are effectively greater than 100% efficient due to the heat output being significantly greater then the electrical energy consumed. Before anyone says that's impossible, they are heat pumps. so are extracting energy (heat) from the atmosphere (or ground) and moving into the home.
Does that include the large amount of fossil fuel that was probably used to manufacture said heat pump?Heat pumps are effectively greater than 100% efficient due to the heat output being significantly greater then the electrical energy consumed. Before anyone says that's impossible, they are heat pumps. so are extracting energy (heat) from the atmosphere (or ground) and moving into the home.
Referring to the OP,is the aim to help mr and mrs smith save a few quid a year or as I suspect more to do with CC.
Sustainable energy is becoming an even greater percentage of power generation.
If all new homes require no heating and with LED lighting the load per home will be massively reduced. Hence less cost to consumer.
I speak from experience as we just finished our new house.
The sums are quite easy to do.
Lord Marylebone said:
Producing electricity centrally in vast quantities and then using it to heat individual homes is far more efficient from a fuel/emissions point of view than having millions of gas boilers heating individual homes.
.
Sorry but this is nonsense. A huge chunk of our centralised generation is gas (some coal still). Problem is that the most efficient CCGT can operate at approx 60% thermodynamic efficiency but a lot of the gas turbines are not CCGT because they have to ramp up and down quickly (renewables are erratic) non CCTG are probably operating in the 40-50% efficiency range. Now allow for transmission losses. Something like 40-45% efficiency from generator to home. A home condensing boiler can operate at approx 90%, so basically you would use and burn approx twice as much gas doing it your way barring the contribution of nukes and renewables (which can be contributing very little at times)..
s2art said:
Lord Marylebone said:
Producing electricity centrally in vast quantities and then using it to heat individual homes is far more efficient from a fuel/emissions point of view than having millions of gas boilers heating individual homes.
.
Sorry but this is nonsense. A huge chunk of our centralised generation is gas (some coal still). Problem is that the most efficient CCGT can operate at approx 60% thermodynamic efficiency but a lot of the gas turbines are not CCGT because they have to ramp up and down quickly (renewables are erratic) non CCTG are probably operating in the 40-50% efficiency range. Now allow for transmission losses. Something like 40-45% efficiency from generator to home. A home condensing boiler can operate at approx 90%, so basically you would use and burn approx twice as much gas doing it your way barring the contribution of nukes and renewables (which can be contributing very little at times)..
Why do you need heating in an energy efficient house?
Hot water service only can be done with electric and part solar.
P.S. Whilst home condensing boilers can acheive 90% in the real world they are along way from that.
Edited by Nickgnome on Thursday 14th March 14:59
Nickgnome said:
s2art said:
Lord Marylebone said:
Producing electricity centrally in vast quantities and then using it to heat individual homes is far more efficient from a fuel/emissions point of view than having millions of gas boilers heating individual homes.
.
Sorry but this is nonsense. A huge chunk of our centralised generation is gas (some coal still). Problem is that the most efficient CCGT can operate at approx 60% thermodynamic efficiency but a lot of the gas turbines are not CCGT because they have to ramp up and down quickly (renewables are erratic) non CCTG are probably operating in the 40-50% efficiency range. Now allow for transmission losses. Something like 40-45% efficiency from generator to home. A home condensing boiler can operate at approx 90%, so basically you would use and burn approx twice as much gas doing it your way barring the contribution of nukes and renewables (which can be contributing very little at times)..
Why do you need heating in an energy efficient house?
Hot water service only can be done with electric and part solar.
s2art said:
Why do you need heating in an energy efficient home? Tell that to people in the north during the beast from the east last year.
Well... not quite the same but it reminds me of a skiing holiday in Finland. Inside the artic circle with temperatures around -20 at night. We had a small detached "log cabin" that was heated by a single 2kW electric heater. We had the heater on for about a hour a night just to take the chill off when we got in. Toasty and warm just with body heat So yes, it can be done if you put your mind to it!
Contrast that with the usual state of new builds in the UK. 8" of loft insulation but with a dozen big holes in it to clear the bathroom downlights. Dot and dab plasterboard walls giving an air gap up to the loft so wind whistles through the sockets all round the house. We really do build crap houses.....
brman said:
Contrast that with the usual state of new builds in the UK. 8" of loft insulation but with a dozen big holes in it to clear the bathroom downlights. Dot and dab plasterboard walls giving an air gap up to the loft so wind whistles through the sockets all round the house. We really do build crap houses.....
lol, I recently (January) stayed in a "holiday cottage" that was newly built, about 9 months since completion, and which had been unoccupied the week before. It had under floor heating throughout which took about two days to get the place to an acceptable temperature, the only other heat source was electric towel rail radiators in each bathroom that each had two hour timers on them, I had to keep running round to put them on again to get some heat in the place to keep everyone warm.But yes the worst thing was the ice cold draughts pouring through all the wall sockets! I guess this would be due to the air gap behind the plasterboard that you're mentioning. There wasn't a loft in this place, it was bunker style with a flat roof.
We looked its sale price up, the place had cost the best part of £1m and still had this hopeless heating and cold air belching from all the wall sockets.
brman said:
s2art said:
Why do you need heating in an energy efficient home? Tell that to people in the north during the beast from the east last year.
Well... not quite the same but it reminds me of a skiing holiday in Finland. Inside the artic circle with temperatures around -20 at night. We had a small detached "log cabin" that was heated by a single 2kW electric heater. We had the heater on for about a hour a night just to take the chill off when we got in. Toasty and warm just with body heat So yes, it can be done if you put your mind to it!
Contrast that with the usual state of new builds in the UK. 8" of loft insulation but with a dozen big holes in it to clear the bathroom downlights. Dot and dab plasterboard walls giving an air gap up to the loft so wind whistles through the sockets all round the house. We really do build crap houses.....
Much cheaper to build as well.
It matters not whether you live in Scotland or down South.
The UK is abysmally poor at domestic contruction and falles well behind many areas of Europe and even parts of the USA.
It is interesting that LED lighting can be achieved at less that 2-3W/m2
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff