www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-54670269
Isn't it inevitable that the US oil industry will wither? I'm not sure what anybody thinks pretending otherwise will achieve.
|
|
Being on other forums with americans that live in oil states, the view is that the previous president was going to cut them off at the knees. This one supports them, the idea that oil/gas is disappearing is tomorrows problem/ other countries problem to deal with not ours.
Last edited by: sooty123 on Sat 24 Oct 20 at 18:31
|
>> Being on other forums with americans that live in oil states, the view is that
>> the previous president was going to cut them off at the knees. This one supports
>> them, the idea that oil/gas is disappearing is tomorrows problem/ other countries problem to deal
>> with not ours.
The problem is that its their problem, their problem very soon, and the great American population does not trust "big oil"
|
>> The problem is that its their problem, their problem very soon, and the great American
>> population does not trust "big oil"
>>
Hard to say, in flyover state coal and oil still have a big sway, say wyoming, but who knows for how long. The UK moved away from coal pretty quickly, now very little is used.
Large parts of the US could easily provide solar power, wind power etc, for large parts of the country but there's a reluctance to switch. Its not down to technical issues.
|
The Trump rhetoric of "America First" may be a short term vote winner, but as a long term strategy is is not working.
I am mindful that many in the US do not buy in to that which seem unarguable in the UK - eg: universal health care, gun control etc.
Four years ago the US had an economic and moral lead in the world pecking order. They were not perfect but their dominance was undeniable.
Trump has lead them away from the Climate Change accord and the World Health Organisation. Neither is perfect but it would be better to change them from within, not pull out completely. It's part of the tough guy "cowboy" mentality taking precedence.
Economically China is rapidly supplanting the US as world leader. They are also far from perfect but seem to have a clear pragmatic strategic view of where they are heading and behave consistently.
I don't doubt that when it suits them they will change course with equal clarity of purpose.
The election in a few weeks time may seal the fate of the US for decades to come.
|
Oil, Gas & Coal provide 70% of the energy used in the world.
Reasons - "cheap" + reliable+ easily stored
Wind & Solar have fatal flaws - wind is unreliable & solar is limited to approximately 1/2 a day.
There is no way that the world will replace oil & gas in the next 30 years.
We would need say 4 x the electricity production and we would need to dig up every street in the UK & replace the cabling into every home.
A few months back an about to open Distillery needed a 3 phase supply from a sub-station about 500 metres away. Roads partially closed, traffic lights on X roads - 8+ men, diggers, lorries carting away/delivering road metal. In total it took 6 weeks/ 6 days per week to connect 1 factory to a 3 phase supply.
In the UK every street effectively needs a similar supply as the distillery - add to that maybe 50% of homes would need re-wiring - 90% of homes are gas heating & electricity for everything else - as gas is about quarter/a third of electricity then average homes would need to spend say 2 to 4 x their current bills. Power poverty affects many UK homes - at 2 to 4 times current bills Power Poverty would be a problem for most households.
Oil & Gas will be with us for a l o n g time.
|
>> Oil & Gas will be with us for a l o n g time.
As the supply is finite it w o n t
|
|
Home heating is an interesting one, how do we replace gas boilers and with what?
|
>> Home heating is an interesting one, how do we replace gas boilers and with what?
The suggestions I've seen are:
Electric - same issues as above with how its generated and local supply cpacity
Air Heat Pump - effectively reverse air conditioning, even of no effect over wide areas I'd have though localised chill would be an issue.
Ground Heat - not sure how that works on large scale either.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Sun 25 Oct 20 at 08:45
|
|
All three seem fairly poor replacements, I think we'll be using gas for some time yet.
|
>> All three seem fairly poor replacements, I think we'll be using gas for some time
>> yet.
Article is from 18months or so ago but gives an overview of the challenges involved.
www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/mar/13/hammond-says-gas-heating-will-be-replaced-by-low-carbon-systems
|
|
The thing that leapt out at me was £26k for existing houses, I can't see many people paying that.
|
|
If insulation is improved significantly using modern techniques and materials the heat input required will be reduced. I thought some new builds can survive on body heat and heat from various electrical devices in the home for much of the year.
|
|
There are new builds that can do that, I remember a local news program about them last year. However there's millions of houses where it won't be possible to do that.
|
Air Heat Pumps can work well when there temperature difference - heat extract from outside air heats the inside.
Unfortunately when the external air is approaching freezing point you cannot extract heat from the cold air.
Ground heat exchangers can still extract heat from the ground even when the top soil is frozen. The problem is every garden would need to be excavated & back filled - not an easy or cheap task. Then there are huge numbers of people living in flats etc with no gardens.
|
Oil and gas are finite. At some point change will be needed.
There are alternatives available now. Implementation over the next 10-30 years as the current infrastructure is replaced is realistic. That it does not work in all circumstances for everyone today is a very poor reason not to start - eg:
1. Air source heat pumps have an efficiency of around 4. For every KW of power put in you get 4KW heat back. It may not make sense to replace a perfectly serviceable gas boiler now, but when it fails at some point in the next 20 years...... Were I building a new house today I would look very closely at eliminating any requirement for a gas supply.
2. Mandatory installation of solar on domestic roofs could provide most domestic power needs if combined with battery storage - possibly integrated with EVs.
3. Improvements to design and insulation standards in new builds can deliver close to zero energy needs for heating. Some elements more difficult to retrofit than others.
4. When gas is no longer used, the entire distribution network can be decommissioned - a major saving which may pay for improvements to the electricty network.
5. Wind and solar whole life cost per KWH is now competitive with oil and gas. Storage needs improvement. This is not an absolute barrier - simply that it hasn't yet been fully solved!
Major energy users may need other solutions - nuclear base load, local generators, local gas and oil storage etc. But this should not deflect the general direction of travel.
|
|
They are good ideas, but at what cost? How much is an air or ground source heat pump fitted?
|
>> They are good ideas, but at what cost? How much is an air or ground
>> source heat pump fitted?
Its (all of it, panels, insulation, heat recovery etc) about £26k extra (at design & new home build stage) for an average 3 bed home.
Last edited by: Zero on Sun 25 Oct 20 at 11:47
|
|
That's pretty pricey. Even if we have a massive increase in new builds, there's still millions of older houses and they'll be about for a long time. What do we do about them?
Last edited by: VxFan on Mon 26 Oct 20 at 10:46
|
|
You modify it when the gas supply dries up. There will be a grant and you take out a mortgage for the rest,
|
>>What do we do about them?
What proportion of existing houses had insulation in 1970?
What proportion of those same houses have insulation now?
Ok, not quite the same, but there are similarities.
You do nothing. You just let time and people take their course and each year the unconverted will reduce, one way or another and as conversion prices decrease, that will continue down to a level which is ignorable.
We don't need the use of oil and gas to stop dead. We just need it on a downward trend.
|
|
No dwelling in the UK over 30 years old has not had substantial sums of money spent on maintenance renovations or alterations. Over 20 years I have probably spent £40k on mine. This is just one of those cycles.
|
>> No dwelling in the UK over 30 years old has not had substantial sums of
>> money spent on maintenance renovations or alterations. Over 20 years I have probably spent £40k
>> on mine. This is just one of those cycles.
Thirty years ago was 1990. There'll be more than a few with at least one or two rooms still in builder's magnolia. Original heating and kitchens etc. If I drive round the areas of London where I lived in HMOs nearly 40 years ago there's still a lot of single glazing and net curtains.
The main estate in this village was built in the seventies. I think the last of the softwood windows have gone but I'd be amazed if there were not still plenty with the original warm air heating. They were mostly built by Colroy to the standards of the time. Outer skin is red or 'local colour' brick. Inner is block work. No cavity insulation and little in the loft.
We had one from 90 to 98. I put additional insulation in the loft but never did anything with the walls. Once the ventilation of ill fitting wood windows/doors went we had issues with condensation.
They tend to be occupied sequentially by people with new/expanding families for whom projects priced in £k, unless added to the mortgage, are out of reach.
|
>> Thirty years ago was 1990. There'll be more than a few with at least one
>> or two rooms still in builder's magnolia. Original heating and kitchens etc. If I drive
>> round the areas of London where I lived in HMOs nearly 40 years ago there's
>> still a lot of single glazing and net curtains.
Of 70 properties in my road, 6, thats less than 10%, have yet to be substantially altered or updated. Essentially they are waiting for the owner to die.
And I bet few of the properties in your village estate still have warm air heating
|
>> Of 70 properties in my road, 6, thats less than 10%, have yet to be
>> substantially altered or updated. Essentially they are waiting for the owner to die.
I suspect that reflects the area in which you live and their disposable income or capital. The fact you mention 'waiting for the owner to die' differentiates it from the sort of estate I speak of.
Apart from being a bit noisy the warm air heating was surprisingly good; nothing like it for getting a cold house toasty in minimum time. The local firm that supplied the kit, Johnson and Starley, are still going.
|
|
The use of coal both domestic and industrial is a case in point. Some may argue Maggie destroyed it, but in fact coal consumption and production had been in decline for years, 1952 was the peak year for coal consumed for energy, coal production had been falling since 1913. The decline accelerated in the late 50's and all through the 60's
|
I get that, be interesting to see over what time frame it happens. I think the dates people have put on there seem unrealistically fast (to me anyway) such as 2025 to stop using fossil fuel heating. But who knows?
Anyone on here got a ground source heat pump?
Last edited by: VxFan on Mon 26 Oct 20 at 10:46
|
|
you don't need one. But quite a few now have good insulation and sealing to reduce electricity heating consumption out of the kilowatts per day territory. You see plenty of solar panels on roofs. Add some forced air heat recovery into that mix and you are a long way towards very low carbon home consumption.
|
|
Perhaps not, more a comment to see if anyone had any of the modern low carbon ways to keep a house warm fitted and what their experience was.
Last edited by: sooty123 on Sun 25 Oct 20 at 14:50
|
A mate down in Somerset had his whole garden dug up and a horizontal ground source system installed. Wasn't cheap but his bills now are next to nothing for heating and I believe it's low maintenance.
There are quite a few (generally but not exclusively younger) people who will spend good money to reduce their carbon footprint (I mean reduce it not just offset it), and will factor it into spending decisions for household equipment. For instance there is a discussion on another forum I am on about the efficiency of heat pump tumble dryers, which are more expensive to buy, usually slower to run but in general are better for the environment.
The dates are probably challenging but you have to have targets.
|
There are quite a few (generally but not exclusively younger) people who will spend good
>> money to reduce their carbon footprint
I'm sure there are, I'm more thinking about groups of people that are on lower wages in older houses say. I don't think change will be particularly fast for them.
>> The dates are probably challenging but you have to have targets.
Agreed, although there's a balance between challenging and realistic.
>>
|
>> on another forum I am on about the efficiency of heat pump tumble dryers, which
>> are more expensive to buy, usually slower to run but in general are better for
>> the environment.
Even better is a clothes line.
|
>> Even better is a clothes line.
Without a shadow of a doubt. We haven't used any form of artificial drying in more than 5 years despite having a fully functioning tumble dryer.
But it doesn't rain very much here and it's always forecast.
An unpredictable English winter is a whole 'nother ball game.
|
Granted there are days when n a tumble dryer is useful bit I would say 90% of our washing is dried on a line. It doesn’t have to be sunny:windy is good. I’m surprised that this simple device i# never promoted by the green fraternity.
Those whirlly driers are no good though. A straight line works far better
|
>>Granted there are days when n a tumble dryer is useful bit I would say 90% of our washing is dried on a line.
Not sure that we achieve 90% in the UK, but certainly a lot more than half.
Stuff from a washing line smells fresher somehow.
>>Those whirlly driers are no good though
Only ever had one once and that was a matter of space more than anything else. I did kind of think they'd be good though, doesn't whirly add to drying?
|
>> Only ever had one once and that was a matter of space more than anything
>> else. I did kind of think they'd be good though, doesn't whirly add to drying?
We've had a 'whirly' for years, renewed now and then as line/plastic parts/umbrella mechanism etc give up the ghost. It's easier in the space we have then a long line.
I don't think the rotation adds anything to drying action. We try to use only alternate rows to allow a bit more airflow around clothes. Good in the summer and being largely clad in Rohan garb my stuff dries quickly.
Some things are easier in the tumbler particularly towels which go hard on the line. Also some easy care stuff gets by without ironing if tumbled but not when line dried. The poly-cotton shirts I wore when still in a collar/tie environment were a case in point.
|
We use a clothes airer in the smallest bedroom with a dehumidifier when it's wet. Don't know if it's any more efficient than a tumble dryer.
Bought the dehumidifier years ago when we had a leak, so think we may as well use it. Supplys a useful amount of soft water for use in the iron and steam cleaner - I use the surplus in the screen wash.
|
The trouble with the whirly thing is that the washing on the ousside dries OK but the suff on the inner part takes far longer being shielded form the sun annd wnd and by its very nature the washing crates a humid atomosphere on the inside preventing drying. If you have the room a basic line with a prop, an essential accessory y works far better. Our line is quite long stretching form the house to a very large oak tree so takes a fair load.
Then there is of course peg technology to discuss. I favour the traditional split wooden storm peg. Not so prone to UV induced failure like the plastic variety.
One thing I have missed in recent years are those days when it is so cold the washing freezes on the line and items are frozen rigid. Global warming has a lot to anwer for.
|
>> The trouble with the whirly thing is that
They dont whirl.
|
>> >> The trouble with the whirly thing is that
>>
>> They don't whirl.
>>
I'm on to that. Here's my patent.
patents.google.com/patent/GB2397221A/en
|
>> >> >> The trouble with the whirly thing is that
>> >>
>> >> They don't whirl.
>> >>
Mine does, very easily.
I am still very happy with our Whirline Major rotary made in Newry NI.
I bought it S/H about forty years ago.
old-things.co.uk/?tag=whirline-rotary-clothes-line
It has never been pampered and stays out all the time yet is in fantastic condition.
It has four arms and approx. 2.2m betweens the outmost tips with 7 lines.
( I now read it was 7 feet 3 inches and 90 feet of drying line.)
I replaced the line for the second time last year. I had to buy a whole reel of plastic coated steel wire to satisfy it. IIRC it needed about 40 m so that would make a looong washing line.
It is not a silly lightweigh kiddies job. It is so well built to a very very good standard.
It spins very very easily and I even have a clip on cord to teather it.
Very rarely have any plastic pegs failed me.
|
>>I replaced the line for the second time last year.
Is there a method for doing that? I replaced mine earlier this year and I'm forever re-tensioning it. There wasn't enough of the original line left for me to follow.
|
>> >>I replaced the line for the second time last year.
>>
>> Is there a method for doing that? I replaced mine earlier this year and I'm
>> forever re-tensioning it. There wasn't enough of the original line left for me to follow.
>>
My line is plastic coated steel wire.
Looking at the youtube items it appears that there is also plastic or nylon braided poly core with a plastic skin.
I would expect these both to keep streatching.
I have no idea how other makes are threaded but some Youtube.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=z9GZOFNZGTI
www.youtube.com/watch?v=3VWv8kJ89fU
www.youtube.com/watch?v=z3b2twBXfOE
www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZAU3tkg0R4
The last video shows a rotary almost identical to mine.
As you might expect not cheap these days.
clothesline.ie/
|
Actually I’m beginning to have my doubts about the physics of the whirly line. If the line is allowed to move freely with the wind doesn't that effectively reduce the airspeed over the clothes and actually slow the drying process.?
|
Oh I love conversations like this....
Surely much as one 'side' (if we regard it as a square) would lose out, one other side would gain and two others would be neutral?
So the clothes would dry more / same / less / same as they went around?
|
|
What are you lot on about? Don't you have one of those basket things that you throw mucky clothes in and a few hours later they're back in the closet cleaned and pressed?
|
>> What are you lot on about? Don't you have one of those basket things that you throw mucky >>clothes in and a few hours later they're back in the closet cleaned and pressed?
>>
Or just leave em on the floor and the result is still the same ? :-(
|
>>There is no way that the world will replace oil & gas in the next 30 years.
To kill the O&G industry it doesn't need to. A drop of about 30% ought to do it.
|
All these wonderful options.
Quite a few folks say " They do not build then as well as our houses circa 1930s"
Our upper bedrooms have 4" external walls.
Not sure how they will be brought up to standard.
A foot thick external cladding ?
|
>>They do not build then as well as our houses circa 1930s"
Our upper bedrooms have 4" external walls.
This owse was built in the 1930's and the walls are 18" thick, I knows that because I had to drill an 'ole for the sat cable this week.
>>A foot thick external cladding ?
Neighb in ye olde cottidge (where we used to live) has just had her granite walls insulated (internal) and these 'new fangled' German (ceramic) heaters fitted - all for nowt as part of this 'ere new green thing.
She's over 80 but far from borassic.
|
I agree with the thought that little significant needs to be done to facilitate the transition from fossil fuels to green sources.
It may need a small push occassionally through (for instance) tax breaks (eg: zero VAT on heat pumps), subsidies for a period (feed in tariffs?), limited legislation (eg new building regulations)
But most will vote with their financial feet. Not all properties will need upgrade or refurbishment in the next 30 years, but at a guess 80%+ will need new heating systems, 70%+ will have new kitchens, windows, bathrooms etc, 30%+ will have major building work (extensions etc).
Today there are properties which have not been updated or upgraded since 1990, 30 years ago.
There will be those in 2050 still indistinguishable from homes today. Owners, like today, will only sell unimproved property at a discounted price to allow for the costs of refurbishment.
The only question is the speed of change - not whether it will actually happen.
|
Are heat pumps economical?
I have been offered a green home grant for 50% off one but reading about how they work seems like sci-fi to me!
|
I think they can be but "they" say you'd want to start with making sure your home is properly insulated. There is also a pump which runs a lot of the time (leccy) whch would have a cost, which you can offset a bit with solar panels.
I believe underfloor heating is preferred over rads too.
The renewables forums at www.navitron.org.uk/forum/ have masses of information though some is really technical. You can ask questions there but they do tend to assume people know a bit about what they're asking about.
OTOH there is google for questions like yours.
|
I had thoughts of buying a bungalow - 3 beds, 2 bathrooms, lounge dining & kitchen - budget is flexible.
No new bungalows being built within 10-15 miles - the odd one in the odd village are new but the villages are extremely rough & in the middle of nowhere - also about 800- 900 feet - snow is a known issue for Nov to March
In the space of 2 months 3 bungalows came up on the same estate a mile from me - 55 years old - all in a sorry state - one had the original kitchen & bathroom - the other 2 had replacements but still 25/30+ years.
1 bought and done up by the new owner, 2 bought be developers who flipped the property with minimal cheap bathroom/kitchen and very little else (Lots of emulsion, Still old boiler & white paint on 55 year old steel rads, the odd poor quality window) and "offer over prices" which galloped above their true value.
The 3 bungalows was an ideal chance to insulate & fit better heating BUT the cost of that might be £25/£30K on top of the other work pushing the prices too high or giving the developer very little profit for their 6-8 week flip.
|
Perhaps the willingness of owners to fully upgrade property depends on value. It is much easier to justify spending (say) £20k on a property worth £400k than on one valued at £100k.
This has consequences - some lower priced properties will:
- become increasingly sub-standard
- their relative value will fall further
- properties will only be attractive to the financially marginal
- they will slowly decay as owners will find even basic maintenance unaffordable
- energy costs will increase due to lack of insulation and technology
- ultimately they will be deemed uninhabitable
- demolition and redevolpment follows
All very sad, but this is not a problem to all properties everywhere. It is just a part of the renewal process (and always has been)
|
I mostly agree but you did forget...
- lose so much value that they become attractive to those seeking a bargain they can improve.
|
The US and oil.... - sooty123
