Extreme house insulation

[r.bartlett]

Scuse my ignorance, I've heard of OLED telly screens but not FLED, what are they?

my bad FLCD

Ferro-electric Liquid Crystal Display

 

[RigidRaider]

Is that better than the huge cathode ray tube TV we have, that took two blokes to bring into the house?

 

[bhm1712]

The local council in Bulwell Notts is in the middle of putting this external insulation on a huge amount of council properties. They have also rendered the finish and made it look like brick and cement: http://www.netweber.co.uk/renders-d...eration-one-coat-ewi-render/weberrend-rb.html


I wonder how much this has cost?

If stuff was more affordable, then im sure more people would become more energy self dependant. To install solar panels and other sources of 'green renewable energy' costs the average working joe about £15,000 for a decent set up, but the dole monkeys get it free.

If shale gas fracking becomes 'hot' get ready for your house to be devalued by about £30,000 if the fracking is taking place in your area. This fracking will cause much unrest and problems in the future im thinking....

 

[calorific]

But why 21 degrees?

Nobody achieved progress by setting their standards lower.

Agreed, but why is 21 a higher standard than 20 degrees. Being excessive uneccesarity isn't a higher standard and we now at those factories of yesteryear that used so much fuel with barely a nod at heat efficiency with perplexion. There is no physical reason for 21 to be an appropriate ambient temperature. Lowering it to 17 or 18 would use significantly less fuel and not be unpleasant to relax in.

We have the technology to make houses that can stay at such a comfortable temperature with almost no energy input.

True, but how much will it cost and how long will it take to convert existing stock to this level of efficiency, and what is a "comfortable level"?

Why not 21 degrees?

Many reasons - health for a start.

Why not read a novel and have a few meals on a boat, than invent a plane.

Moving forward by making bad choices isn't a sign of progress.

 

[ladylola]

Posted: Sat Oct 20, 2012 1:42 pm

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ladylola wrote:
The one key element in this or any energy crisis is always pretty much ignored and that is levels of consumption. To provide a "solution" involves at worst not raising consumption and better still reducing it, we have higher levels of energy production now than we did 30 or 60 years ago and we have a crisis looming now .

Reducing consumption means either turning things off or increasing efficiency. There was a massive hoo ha when std 100w bulbs were banned but that was needed to force the improvement of led both for quality and price. IE a market had to be made in order for the led manufacturers compete. This is what governments do best. Enforce change despite the fuss. They don't get it right very often but in a few years when everybody has gen 10+ lamps there will be no fond memories of filament bulbs

Where they are getting it wrong is 20 years ago there should enforced government assisted insulation upgrades to all homes below a certain energy rating to bring them within acceptable limits. No opt out allowed. All UK homes must comply irrespective of size or age.

Those who refuse will have their homes reassessed and their rates will go up accordingly (ie the cost of not complying)

In general I agree with what you say, insulation is the way to go.
Increasing effeciency is a bit of a double edged sword (google the energy efficiecy paradox) because increased efficiency can lead to higher consumption, for example 30 years ago hardly anyone put christmas lights outside their house but now with the new led technogoly lights are everywhere. LED's have a lower consumption than bulbs but the overall consumption has gone up because bulbs were rarely used in the first place. Solar powered garden lights are another example, rather than replacing something inefficient they are being used for a purpose that was non exsistant in the past. Actually a better use is to put them on the window cill and use them in the house instead of the house lights but ho hum.

 

[peterperfection]

LED lighting is the reason more people are needing specs these days.

 

[Brigadier]

^^^please explain.

 

[bhm1712]

Posted: Sat Oct 20, 2012 1:42 pm

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ladylola wrote:
The one key element in this or any energy crisis is always pretty much ignored and that is levels of consumption. To provide a "solution" involves at worst not raising consumption and better still reducing it, we have higher levels of energy production now than we did 30 or 60 years ago and we have a crisis looming now .

Reducing consumption means either turning things off or increasing efficiency. There was a massive hoo ha when std 100w bulbs were banned but that was needed to force the improvement of led both for quality and price. IE a market had to be made in order for the led manufacturers compete. This is what governments do best. Enforce change despite the fuss. They don't get it right very often but in a few years when everybody has gen 10+ lamps there will be no fond memories of filament bulbs

Where they are getting it wrong is 20 years ago there should enforced government assisted insulation upgrades to all homes below a certain energy rating to bring them within acceptable limits. No opt out allowed. All UK homes must comply irrespective of size or age.

Those who refuse will have their homes reassessed and their rates will go up accordingly (ie the cost of not complying)

In general I agree with what you say, insulation is the way to go.
Increasing effeciency is a bit of a double edged sword (google the energy efficiecy paradox) because increased efficiency can lead to higher consumption, for example 30 years ago hardly anyone put christmas lights outside their house but now with the new led technogoly lights are everywhere. LED's have a lower consumption than bulbs but the overall consumption has gone up because bulbs were rarely used in the first place. Solar powered garden lights are another example, rather than replacing something inefficient they are being used for a purpose that was non exsistant in the past. Actually a better use is to put them on the window cill and use them in the house instead of the house lights but ho hum.

...but solar powered garden lamps are not really contributing to people using more energy...yes people now use them alot, and they could be put to better use, but relatively speaking they are not taking from the grid, and give nothing back to the grid. They remain a neutral point...

 

[ladylola]

Whilst they don't consume anything from the grid you do have to take their embodied energy into consideration i.e. the amount of energy taken to produce the bloody things after all they don't just grow on trees

 

[calorific]

Whilst they don't consume anything from the grid you do have to take their embodied energy into consideration i.e. the amount of energy taken to produce the bloody things after all they don't just grow on trees

So, what is their carbon footprint? Positive or negative equity?

 

[Mikefromlondon]

Whilst they don't consume anything from the grid you do have to take their embodied energy into consideration i.e. the amount of energy taken to produce the bloody things after all they don't just grow on trees

That might be true, but once you have bought it, it is yours, from then on you are not going to be dictated how much to pay forever increasing prices of energy.

 

[ladylola]

Ah yes, BUT , you haven't actually replaced your exsisting electric demands you've increased your overall consumption and the energy reqired to make them has to come from building extra power stations. Now if you were to use these solar devices to power say a fridge then we are on the right track.

 

[ladylola]

Whilst they don't consume anything from the grid you do have to take their embodied energy into consideration i.e. the amount of energy taken to produce the bloody things after all they don't just grow on trees

So, what is their carbon footprint? Positive or negative equity?

Basically negative as they aren't replacing some other energy use they are adding to it and quite frankly in this case do they actually do anything useful. See the above post.

 

[ajstoneservices]

Power a fridge? I have 9KWp of pv on my roof and in this weather it cant produce enough power to light one of our 3w led lamps


Edit: I should know better I have 9KWp not 9kw on my roof.

 

[ladylola]

You've spot the slight flaw haven't you. I don't expect all those garden lights to be lighting up the sky later either.