On 28/10/2022 13:35, Spike wrote:
> alan_m <junk@admac.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> The ASHP hype is that you can get it installed for less than £10K which
>> suggests just bolting it in as a replacement to a gas/oil boiler.
>
> A few days ago we got a leaflet through the door telling us that British
> Gas could install an ASHP for £4999. Some small print mentioned ‘depending
> on what we need to do inside your home’ (or words to that effect). A
> government grant of £5k was also mentioned.
>

£5k from the Government or £5K from the green levy on our energy bills?
If there is a major problem with government finances capping our
(nominal) energy bills at £2.5k where are they finding all the money to
subsidise 13million households with £5k for ASHPs?

--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

On 27/10/2022 21:22, Theo wrote:
> alan_m <junk@admac.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>> Despite the title of the video this guy is having a dig at a few Youtube
>> heating engineers that say that ASHP do not work. He is advocating that
>> if do the maths first and correctly size your system then ASHP do work well.
>>
>> What this video probably confirms is that bolting a ASHP to an existing
>> hot water radiator distribution, without modification and without
>> existing underfloor heating, is unlikely to give acceptable results.
>
> Heh. I have the 13kW version of that heatpump. House not particularly well
> insulated (quite lossy upstairs; open chimney; windows open a lot of the
> time for fresh air), but perfectly warm when it's running. We did replace
> all the rads, maybe 50% bigger in area than the old ones, which were grotty
> 1970s single panel single convector units. No UFH. Most of the pipework
> was left as-is, apart from the feed to the heatpump (which is in a different
> place to the oil boiler) and the replacement cylinder plumbing.
>
> I uprated to the 13kW for cooling purposes (an ongoing DIY project): 10kW
> was what the heatloss calcs came out with. There are some efficiency hits
> in the design - bigger than necessary heatpump; slightly higher flow temps
> given the radiator sizing; hot water is supposed to be 55C but I've reduced
> it to 44C which is fine; buffer tank because the installer was lazy and
> doing an install like it was a boiler (this is however helpful from a
> cooling perspective)
>
> I'll post 12 month energy consumption numbers in December, but so far bills
> have been fine.

For a boiler replacement I've been looking at my heat loss calculations
that I performed 30 years ago. Since then various items in my property
have been replaced or improved which has resulted in less heat loss.
All those years ago I added multiple (5 to 10%) factors of safety to the
calculations and assumed too high a temperature difference by a few
degrees*. The radiators were also selected to fit in the selected space
and rated just above the elevated heat loss calculation(s).

My original calculations for whole house heat loss was around 11kW but
now closer to 8kW. This latter figure seems to be close for the average
quoted for a 3 bed house in the UK (during February). My radiators are
close to being 40% oversized, especially in the rooms used most for
relaxation. I may/will use that to experiment reducing the flow
temperature and hence return temperature and gain a few percent more
efficiency in the condensing boiler.

Apart from the boiler replacement in a slightly different location and
changing an open vent system to a pressurised system no other changes
will be made to the rest of the central heating.

*In the days before the WWW and current ease of obtaining information I
purchased a book of Central Heating which gave various recommendations
and heat loss tables values for different wall/window construction.
Although most of that data was sound it was based on the thinking of
maybe 40 years ago.

--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

On 28/10/2022 10:11, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 27/10/2022 17:48, Vir Campestris wrote:
>> On 27/10/2022 09:43, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>
>>> Yup. 3.8 is rather optimistic and utterly infeasible at low air
>>> temperatures*. Its likely to be half that at best when you need it
>>> the most.
>>>
>>> And that is the killer. The colder it is the less the heat pump will
>>> produce.
>>>
>>> The colder it is the more a nuclear power station  will produce.
>>> The colder it is the less a solar power station  will produce.
>>>
>>> * "Your heat pump may not work as efficiently when the outdoor
>>> temperature falls to below -5 ℃. When the temperature outside is
>>> around 7 ℃, the average heat pump should have a CoP of around 4.5,
>>> however this figure can drop to 2.3 when the temperature outside
>>> decreases to -7 ℃"
>>>
>>> (
>>> https://www.viessmann.co.uk/en/heating-advice/heat-pumps/what-temperature-is-a-heat-pump-not-effective.html )
>>
>> AIUI solar electricity panels quite like cold. The winter problem is
>> that there's not much light, not the temperature.
>>
> Did I say otherwise? Unless you have bought into the climate change
> narrative completely, what makes the world warm is not CO2, its solar
> activity. So cold weather means low solar activity, by definition.
>
> I assumed people would be smart enough to figure that out....
>
Yes, you did say otherwise.

Upthread as I have quoted you said "The colder it is the less a solar
power station will produce." which is not correct.

I think we're on the same page though; solar power is great for running
your aircon, but not for keeping the lights on.

Andy

alan_m <junk@admac.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
> For a boiler replacement I've been looking at my heat loss calculations
> that I performed 30 years ago. Since then various items in my property
> have been replaced or improved which has resulted in less heat loss.
> All those years ago I added multiple (5 to 10%) factors of safety to the
> calculations and assumed too high a temperature difference by a few
> degrees*. The radiators were also selected to fit in the selected space
> and rated just above the elevated heat loss calculation(s).
>
> My original calculations for whole house heat loss was around 11kW but
> now closer to 8kW. This latter figure seems to be close for the average
> quoted for a 3 bed house in the UK (during February). My radiators are
> close to being 40% oversized, especially in the rooms used most for
> relaxation. I may/will use that to experiment reducing the flow
> temperature and hence return temperature and gain a few percent more
> efficiency in the condensing boiler.

Yes, it's rather unfortunate that heating installers have got away with
'finger in the air' heatloss calculations, and then ignored them and fitted
the largest boiler they could. Those kinds of numbers sound reasonable - my
own calcs came to 8kW losses, but the offical ones came to 5kW. I think
there's some amount of leeway given things you don't really know (eg
construction materials, air changes due to ventilation, complicated roof
structures).

Theo

alan_m <junk@admac.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
> On 28/10/2022 13:35, Spike wrote:
>> alan_m <junk@admac.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> The ASHP hype is that you can get it installed for less than £10K which
>>> suggests just bolting it in as a replacement to a gas/oil boiler.
>>
>> A few days ago we got a leaflet through the door telling us that British
>> Gas could install an ASHP for £4999. Some small print mentioned ‘depending
>> on what we need to do inside your home’ (or words to that effect). A
>> government grant of £5k was also mentioned.

> £5k from the Government or £5K from the green levy on our energy bills?

Who knows? The BG leaflet was a bit short on real information.

> If there is a major problem with government finances capping our
> (nominal) energy bills at £2.5k where are they finding all the money to
> subsidise 13million households with £5k for ASHPs?

Where does the government always find its cash :-(

--
Spike

On 28/10/2022 21:25, Vir Campestris wrote:
> Upthread as I have quoted you said "The colder it is the less a solar
> power station  will produce." which is not correct.

It is correct,

Let me spell it out for you.

Winter is cold, because there is less solar energy reaching the ground,
for a shorter time per day. Therefore the colder it is, the less a
solar power station will produce.

In summer, a cloudy day is a colder day, therefore the colder it is,
the less a solar power station will produce.

--
"If you don’t read the news paper, you are un-informed. If you read the
news paper, you are mis-informed."

Mark Twain

On 28/10/2022 22:26, Spike wrote:
> alan_m <junk@admac.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 28/10/2022 13:35, Spike wrote:
>>> alan_m <junk@admac.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The ASHP hype is that you can get it installed for less than £10K which
>>>> suggests just bolting it in as a replacement to a gas/oil boiler.
>>>
>>> A few days ago we got a leaflet through the door telling us that British
>>> Gas could install an ASHP for £4999. Some small print mentioned ‘depending
>>> on what we need to do inside your home’ (or words to that effect). A
>>> government grant of £5k was also mentioned.
>
>> £5k from the Government or £5K from the green levy on our energy bills?
>
> Who knows? The BG leaflet was a bit short on real information.
>
>> If there is a major problem with government finances capping our
>> (nominal) energy bills at £2.5k where are they finding all the money to
>> subsidise 13million households with £5k for ASHPs?
>
> Where does the government always find its cash :-(
>
Until Tin Lizzie and Kwackers got into Downing ST, the government
always relied on pension funds and overseas investors (and a lot of
pension funds there too) to buy the debt that HMG issued in the
form of IOU's or gilts.

Suddenly that changed over one weekend.

On 29/10/2022 10:56, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 28/10/2022 21:25, Vir Campestris wrote:
>> Upthread as I have quoted you said "The colder it is the less a solar
>> power station  will produce." which is not correct.
>
> It is correct,
>
> Let me spell it out for you.
>
> Winter is cold, because there is less solar energy reaching the ground,
> for a shorter time per day. Therefore  the colder it is, the less a
> solar power station will produce.
>
> In summer, a cloudy day is a colder day, therefore  the colder it is,
> the less a solar power station will produce.
>
Today has been cloudy nearly all day, and the solar farms will not be
doing well. Yet it's unseasonably warm.

Sometime we get a patch of clear cold air from Siberia. It's _really_
cold, even though it's bright and sunny. The solar farms will do quite well.

Temperature is not the relevant factor.

But I think I'm banging my head on a brick wall here.

Andy

On 30/10/2022 21:17, Vir Campestris wrote:
> On 29/10/2022 10:56, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 28/10/2022 21:25, Vir Campestris wrote:
>>> Upthread as I have quoted you said "The colder it is the less a solar
>>> power station  will produce." which is not correct.
>>
>> It is correct,
>>
>> Let me spell it out for you.
>>
>> Winter is cold, because there is less solar energy reaching the
>> ground, for a shorter time per day. Therefore  the colder it is, the
>> less a solar power station will produce.
>>
>> In summer, a cloudy day is a colder day, therefore  the colder it is,
>> the less a solar power station will produce.
>>
> Today has been cloudy nearly all day, and the solar farms will not be
> doing well. Yet it's unseasonably warm.
>
Winter is not unseasonably warm,
Winter is when its cold.
Winter is when solar output is at a minimum due to short days, and low
azimuth of the sun

> Sometime we get a patch of clear cold air from Siberia. It's _really_
> cold, even though it's bright and sunny. The solar farms will do quite
> well.
>
> Temperature is not the relevant factor.
>
> But I think I'm banging my head on a brick wall here.
>
> Andy
>

--
"Nature does not give up the winter because people dislike the cold."

― Confucius

On 30/10/2022 23:51, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 30/10/2022 21:17, Vir Campestris wrote:
>> On 29/10/2022 10:56, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> On 28/10/2022 21:25, Vir Campestris wrote:
>>>> Upthread as I have quoted you said "The colder it is the less a
>>>> solar power station  will produce." which is not correct.
>>>
>>> It is correct,
>>>
>>> Let me spell it out for you.
>>>
>>> Winter is cold, because there is less solar energy reaching the
>>> ground, for a shorter time per day. Therefore  the colder it is, the
>>> less a solar power station will produce.
>>>
>>> In summer, a cloudy day is a colder day, therefore  the colder it is,
>>> the less a solar power station will produce.
>>>
>> Today has been cloudy nearly all day, and the solar farms will not be
>> doing well. Yet it's unseasonably warm.
>>
> Winter is not unseasonably warm,
> Winter is when its cold.
> Winter is when solar output is at a minimum due to short days, and low
> azimuth of the sun

And it is the short days and low azimuth that are the reason for the low
output, not the cold temperatures.

Andy

On 30/10/2022 23:51, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 30/10/2022 21:17, Vir Campestris wrote:
>> On 29/10/2022 10:56, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> On 28/10/2022 21:25, Vir Campestris wrote:
>>>> Upthread as I have quoted you said "The colder it is the less a
>>>> solar power station  will produce." which is not correct.
>>>
>>> It is correct,
>>>
>>> Let me spell it out for you.
>>>
>>> Winter is cold, because there is less solar energy reaching the
>>> ground, for a shorter time per day. Therefore  the colder it is, the
>>> less a solar power station will produce.
>>>
>>> In summer, a cloudy day is a colder day, therefore  the colder it is,
>>> the less a solar power station will produce.
>>>
>> Today has been cloudy nearly all day, and the solar farms will not be
>> doing well. Yet it's unseasonably warm.
>>
> Winter is not unseasonably warm,
> Winter is when its cold.

Winter in Fiji is only cold if you are a Fijian.

Expats wear tee-shirts, shorts and flip-flops during a
Fijian winter (while Fijians wear Parkas etc), and sweat
their bollocks off in summer.

On 01/11/2022 16:20, Vir Campestris wrote:
> On 30/10/2022 23:51, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 30/10/2022 21:17, Vir Campestris wrote:
>>> On 29/10/2022 10:56, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>> On 28/10/2022 21:25, Vir Campestris wrote:
>>>>> Upthread as I have quoted you said "The colder it is the less a
>>>>> solar power station  will produce." which is not correct.
>>>>
>>>> It is correct,
>>>>
>>>> Let me spell it out for you.
>>>>
>>>> Winter is cold, because there is less solar energy reaching the
>>>> ground, for a shorter time per day. Therefore  the colder it is, the
>>>> less a solar power station will produce.
>>>>
>>>> In summer, a cloudy day is a colder day, therefore  the colder it
>>>> is, the less a solar power station will produce.
>>>>
>>> Today has been cloudy nearly all day, and the solar farms will not be
>>> doing well. Yet it's unseasonably warm.
>>>
>> Winter is not unseasonably warm,
>> Winter is when its cold.
>> Winter is when solar output is at a minimum due to short days, and low
>> azimuth of the sun
>
> And it is the short days and low azimuth that are the reason for the low
> output, not the cold temperatures.
>

Oh dear, oh bear of little brain.

I never mentioned causality, only correlation.

Its cold in winter. And when the day is overcast
There is low solar output in winter, and when the day is overcast.

The price of grain is high when the summer is wet
The number of drawn county cricket matches is high, when the summer is wet.

Ergo the price of grain is high when there are a high number of drawn
cricket matches.

Note the lack of the word 'because' in all these examples?

No wonder people voted to remain in the EU.

> Andy
>

--
If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will
eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such
time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic
and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally
important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for
the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the
truth is the greatest enemy of the State.

Joseph Goebbels

On 27/10/2022 06:27, Alan wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Oct 2022 20:30:44 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>

> Well, its not though is it. He's probably quoting/mistaking the output
> required to get the room from 5 degrees up to 20 degrees. Once it is
> above 18 degrees, >>>>

I know of a guy who built his house - UFH to be fully heated by air
source hear pump.
When he moved in he simply could not get the house warm enough.
Eventually he hired one of those floor standing lpg fueled hot air blowers.
Once house was hot enough .. the ASHP could keep it running OK

Turned me away from having the same system ... and I used thermal store
& gas boiler for my UFH.

On 02/11/2022 11:12, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 01/11/2022 16:20, Vir Campestris wrote:
>> On 30/10/2022 23:51, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> On 30/10/2022 21:17, Vir Campestris wrote:
>>>> On 29/10/2022 10:56, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>> On 28/10/2022 21:25, Vir Campestris wrote:
>>>>>> Upthread as I have quoted you said "The colder it is the less a
>>>>>> solar power station  will produce." which is not correct.
>>>>>
>>>>> It is correct,
>>>>>
>>>>> Let me spell it out for you.
>>>>>
>>>>> Winter is cold, because there is less solar energy reaching the
>>>>> ground, for a shorter time per day. Therefore  the colder it is,
>>>>> the less a solar power station will produce.
>>>>>
>>>>> In summer, a cloudy day is a colder day, therefore  the colder it
>>>>> is, the less a solar power station will produce.
>>>>>
>>>> Today has been cloudy nearly all day, and the solar farms will not
>>>> be doing well. Yet it's unseasonably warm.
>>>>
>>> Winter is not unseasonably warm,
>>> Winter is when its cold.
>>> Winter is when solar output is at a minimum due to short days, and
>>> low azimuth of the sun
>>
>> And it is the short days and low azimuth that are the reason for the
>> low output, not the cold temperatures.
>>
>
> Oh dear, oh bear of little brain.
>
> I never mentioned causality, only correlation.
>
> Its cold in winter. And when the day is overcast
> There is low solar output in winter, and when the day is overcast.
>
> The price of grain is high when the summer is wet
> The number of drawn county cricket matches is high, when the summer is wet.
>
> Ergo the price of grain is high when there are a high number of drawn
> cricket matches.
>
> Note the lack of the word 'because' in all these examples?
>
>
> No wonder people voted to remain in the EU.
>
>

Do you deny saying "The colder it is the less a solar power station
will produce." ?

That's sounds as if you are claiming causation. But I give up.

Andy

On 02/11/2022 21:35, Vir Campestris wrote:
> On 02/11/2022 11:12, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 01/11/2022 16:20, Vir Campestris wrote:
>>> On 30/10/2022 23:51, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>> On 30/10/2022 21:17, Vir Campestris wrote:
>>>>> On 29/10/2022 10:56, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>> On 28/10/2022 21:25, Vir Campestris wrote:
>>>>>>> Upthread as I have quoted you said "The colder it is the less a
>>>>>>> solar power station  will produce." which is not correct.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is correct,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Let me spell it out for you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Winter is cold, because there is less solar energy reaching the
>>>>>> ground, for a shorter time per day. Therefore  the colder it is,
>>>>>> the less a solar power station will produce.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In summer, a cloudy day is a colder day, therefore  the colder it
>>>>>> is, the less a solar power station will produce.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Today has been cloudy nearly all day, and the solar farms will not
>>>>> be doing well. Yet it's unseasonably warm.
>>>>>
>>>> Winter is not unseasonably warm,
>>>> Winter is when its cold.
>>>> Winter is when solar output is at a minimum due to short days, and
>>>> low azimuth of the sun
>>>
>>> And it is the short days and low azimuth that are the reason for the
>>> low output, not the cold temperatures.
>>>
>>
>> Oh dear, oh bear of little brain.
>>
>> I never mentioned causality, only correlation.
>>
>> Its cold in winter. And when the day is overcast
>> There is low solar output in winter, and when the day is overcast.
>>
>> The price of grain is high when the summer is wet
>> The number of drawn county cricket matches is high, when the summer is
>> wet.
>>
>> Ergo the price of grain is high when there are a high number of drawn
>> cricket matches.
>>
>> Note the lack of the word 'because' in all these examples?
>>
>>
>> No wonder people voted to remain in the EU.
>>
>>
>
> Do you deny saying "The colder it is the less a solar power station will
> produce." ?
>
No.

> That's sounds as if you are claiming causation. But I give up.
>

Only to you.

But then you are suffering from years of state education, Guardian
reading, listening to the BBC and EU brainwashing.

So that when brexit happens, a global pandemic happens, and a war that
causes spiralling inflation, and the cracks finally appear in the
economic can kicking of the global bond markets, somehow Brexit 'caused'
all this to happen...

Brexit was the *result* of the incompetence of the globalist technocrats
to actually deliver benefits, or at least convince enough plebs that
they had.

In short the globalist technocrats, who have just installed Fishy Sunak
as puppet president before converting the UK to a banana republic, have
utterly failed to control the system they built to feather their own
nests. The goose that laid, is dead.

Renewable energy is just another utter disaster of a completely
incompetent technocracy that didnt have a clue what it was doing. It
had, like Putin's Russia, exfoliated anyone competent, honest or
honourable, so all that was left was a bunch of shysters clinging to
power, with no idea what to do with it except lie to their populations.

I repeat: The colder it is the less a solar power station will produce.
The higher the corn price the more drawn cricket matches there will be.
People buy more stuff in colder weather. (Hint: Christmas occurs in
colder weather)

--
"The great thing about Glasgow is that if there's a nuclear attack it'll
look exactly the same afterwards."

Billy Connolly

On 03/11/2022 09:43, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> The higher the corn price the more drawn cricket matches there will be.
> People buy more stuff in colder weather. (Hint: Christmas occurs in
> colder weather)

ROFL. Have you ever had Christmas in the Southern Hemisphere,
or are you a fully paid-up member of the flat earth society ?

On 03/11/2022 12:05, Andrew wrote:
> On 03/11/2022 09:43, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> The higher the corn price the more drawn cricket matches there will be.
>> People buy more stuff in colder weather. (Hint: Christmas occurs in
>> colder weather)
>
> ROFL. Have you ever had Christmas in the Southern Hemisphere,
> or are you a fully paid-up member of the flat earth society ?
>
I like the way he put his own statement in a group with two other
obviously false correlations.

Andy