I bought a (nearly) new build house two years ago. Along with solar panels, it came with a design and nature of build that means that it is really inexpensive to heat in winter, but the indoor temperature stays really high at night (the highest need for AC is at bedtime to go to sleep). I therefore installed AC in several rooms of the house, told by the supplier that though there are no grants, they at least don't have to charge VAT on the system or the labour as they install air to air heat pumps, so get that VAT exemption on green heating.
As well as loving being cool, I also love two things. First, that in autumn and spring I can use this system to quickly heat rooms rather than turn on the central heating. Second, I love that the solar panels on the house directly supply a lot of the power the AC system uses (at least until early evening when the sun drops), and yes, I pre-cool the house during those hours.
Modern AC systems are very quiet, very efficient and, with solar and other green power, make a lot of sense. I hope the policy makers listen to you, Sam.
The lens through which it's seen being "Boiler Replacement" is also problematic.
I'd been told (don't know if it's still correct) that TPTB don't want to promote A2A is "what about hot water".
So I wander round flats, some of which are heated by _direct heat electric_ no less, which would be an ideal match for A2A, and the answer to "hot water" is, indeed and already "my shower, it is electric". "Please see: rest of world".
The perfect has become the enemy of the good.
When I eventually switch to a heat pump (only when the ROI is before the heat-death of the universe), I've no intention of introducing the overcomplication that's hot water cylinders (that are supposed to be 'serviced' and heat-cycled), and I'm just going to attach a dumb-as-a-rock 3-phase electric tankless water heater .
'only when the ROI is before the heat-death of the universe'- lol. A friend of mine studied Environmental Science at the UEA. Your comment reminded me of the early green subsidies on palm oil production. Apparently, the carbon debt from cutting down the rainforests to create 'green' palm oil production was only repaid after roughly 700 years.
This language is typical and misleading. Batteries are improving but they are still a long way from being economic in this context. Heavy subsidy and substantial optimism keep these projects alive. These problems are surely tractable but the current trajectory does not make our 'climate goals' achievable in the the time frames promised by politicians.
The point being made is that AC demand is (marginally) offset to PV production. And that rather than resorting to importing power, users could augment with a battery - "free" energy in.
So battery can never be "not economic" - it's only a question of over what period it would offer a return on investment.
The continuing _plummeting_ of battery costs have helped. My own sums would be a break-even of around 6 years in these types of scenarios.
They can be effective at the grid level for the purposes of demand/surplus dynamics. The main benefit of the Big Battery in Australia was not for the purposes of energy storage. Instead, having an instant source of power available to the grid meant that fossil fuel power plants could be switched off in periods when no excess demand was anticipated, instead of running idle at significant costs for backup sources.
On the other hand, batteries are completely infeasible for energy storage at scale. The same thing is currently true of green hydrogen. Anaerobic digestion is probably the most promising technology as it makes use of existing waste materials like food and agricultural waste, and human and animal waste. It's still a long way from price competitiveness though, but does have significant prospects for improvements through technological innovation.
Biochar/Pyrolysis is another potential technology, but I don't rate it as much as anaerobic digestion, although it does have side benefits in terms of soil health and soil carbon sequestration.
Of course, batteries have a benefit to investors because government is willing to spend taxpayer's money on subsidy schemes.
Interesting point of view, as long as we can avoid US-style freezing aircon forcing to paradoxically wear a jumper when it's 35 degrees outside. Let's hope UK houses can get appropriately designed/renovated to better keep the heat out in the summer. Seems like step 1 to follow.
On another note, a little typo I noticed: you probably mean Norway's cheap hydropower, not geothermal power (that would be the little cousin Iceland 😉).
I bought a (nearly) new build house two years ago. Along with solar panels, it came with a design and nature of build that means that it is really inexpensive to heat in winter, but the indoor temperature stays really high at night (the highest need for AC is at bedtime to go to sleep). I therefore installed AC in several rooms of the house, told by the supplier that though there are no grants, they at least don't have to charge VAT on the system or the labour as they install air to air heat pumps, so get that VAT exemption on green heating.
As well as loving being cool, I also love two things. First, that in autumn and spring I can use this system to quickly heat rooms rather than turn on the central heating. Second, I love that the solar panels on the house directly supply a lot of the power the AC system uses (at least until early evening when the sun drops), and yes, I pre-cool the house during those hours.
Modern AC systems are very quiet, very efficient and, with solar and other green power, make a lot of sense. I hope the policy makers listen to you, Sam.
The lens through which it's seen being "Boiler Replacement" is also problematic.
I'd been told (don't know if it's still correct) that TPTB don't want to promote A2A is "what about hot water".
So I wander round flats, some of which are heated by _direct heat electric_ no less, which would be an ideal match for A2A, and the answer to "hot water" is, indeed and already "my shower, it is electric". "Please see: rest of world".
The perfect has become the enemy of the good.
When I eventually switch to a heat pump (only when the ROI is before the heat-death of the universe), I've no intention of introducing the overcomplication that's hot water cylinders (that are supposed to be 'serviced' and heat-cycled), and I'm just going to attach a dumb-as-a-rock 3-phase electric tankless water heater .
'only when the ROI is before the heat-death of the universe'- lol. A friend of mine studied Environmental Science at the UEA. Your comment reminded me of the early green subsidies on palm oil production. Apparently, the carbon debt from cutting down the rainforests to create 'green' palm oil production was only repaid after roughly 700 years.
Oops!
"Battery storage, increasingly affordable...."
This language is typical and misleading. Batteries are improving but they are still a long way from being economic in this context. Heavy subsidy and substantial optimism keep these projects alive. These problems are surely tractable but the current trajectory does not make our 'climate goals' achievable in the the time frames promised by politicians.
I am pretty sure battery storage has a return on investment.
depends what you count or include, in the end it is subsidy that makes it profitable
What subsidy?
The point being made is that AC demand is (marginally) offset to PV production. And that rather than resorting to importing power, users could augment with a battery - "free" energy in.
So battery can never be "not economic" - it's only a question of over what period it would offer a return on investment.
The continuing _plummeting_ of battery costs have helped. My own sums would be a break-even of around 6 years in these types of scenarios.
They can be effective at the grid level for the purposes of demand/surplus dynamics. The main benefit of the Big Battery in Australia was not for the purposes of energy storage. Instead, having an instant source of power available to the grid meant that fossil fuel power plants could be switched off in periods when no excess demand was anticipated, instead of running idle at significant costs for backup sources.
On the other hand, batteries are completely infeasible for energy storage at scale. The same thing is currently true of green hydrogen. Anaerobic digestion is probably the most promising technology as it makes use of existing waste materials like food and agricultural waste, and human and animal waste. It's still a long way from price competitiveness though, but does have significant prospects for improvements through technological innovation.
Biochar/Pyrolysis is another potential technology, but I don't rate it as much as anaerobic digestion, although it does have side benefits in terms of soil health and soil carbon sequestration.
Of course, batteries have a benefit to investors because government is willing to spend taxpayer's money on subsidy schemes.
Air to air heat pumps that allow cooling are now allowed to be installed within the new building regulations that were introduced in May.
That's permitted development (which technically isn't building regs), but there's still plenty of anti-air-to-air rules.
Interesting point of view, as long as we can avoid US-style freezing aircon forcing to paradoxically wear a jumper when it's 35 degrees outside. Let's hope UK houses can get appropriately designed/renovated to better keep the heat out in the summer. Seems like step 1 to follow.
On another note, a little typo I noticed: you probably mean Norway's cheap hydropower, not geothermal power (that would be the little cousin Iceland 😉).