I do find it hard, oil now over £1 a litre, so if 100% efficient around the 10p/kWh, one can look up the boiler, so I would guess mine around the 80% which lifts the price to around 13p/kWh, then looking at the efficiency of the distribution, say 90% so more realistic to consider it costing 15p/kWh.
So today exported 0.7 kWh at 12p/kWh so would have been better using electric.
But how much faffing around is it worth to gain 2p?
It seems electric generators now classed as road vehicles, how I fail to understand, but it means theft is more of a problem, not just due to cost, but also people can use the 35 sec gas oil in their cars, as no colouring in it. So security on building sites now more of a problem. I assume it is because one can use the generator to re-fuel a car now, maybe we need red, yellow, and blue electric?
If we did, then someone would be bound to change the colours to brown, black and grey just to confuse things!
The problem fuel is the LPG, nearly every other fuel you can shop around, but most LPG the tank belongs to the supplier, so one is tied to a single supplier.
I suppose water is the same! As far as I am aware, I can't change supplier? But it does ask the question, if the water is metered, why should they worry about how much one uses?
Or do we look at the reverse, and in same way as water has a hose pipe ban, can electric suppliers have an outside light ban? Or a patio heater ban etc?
So what is the necessities? If I want food, I have a number of options, go to local shop which is also the petrol/derv filling station. Or go to local town, eight miles away.
To get to local town, could use e-bike, train, bus, taxi, or car, in the main I use the car, but there are other options, the taxi far too expensive, the train does not run in winter, the e-bike is dangerous on these roads, so left with bus or car.
The bus should stop outside my house, but it can't get through the estate due to parked cars, so I need to walk down a steep hill to catch it, which also means up a steep hill with shopping, so in real terms only one option, the car.
But in an emergency the others are there. But with a hospital visit, the options are reduced, I have to go abroad to another country called England in the main, so two trains or two buses, and the time in Shrewsbury is reduced to around an hour, to be able to return the same day.
So three options, car, taxi, or ambulance. Now we need to look at who pays, and also who should pay. Be it a hospital, school, or any other government controlled unit. To have one large unit can increase what can be done there, and reduce running cost, but it also increases transport costs, and it is important they are both paid for out of the same purse. Or we end up paying a silly amount on ambulances, school buses etc. As the accountants are not seeing the whole picture.
To force a someone to pay for taxi's to get to a school or hospital is clearly wrong, same goes for hospital car parks for the person being treated, OK for a visitor, they have an option, but if the law says a child must go to school, then it should not cost the parents money to send the child to school, be it transport or school uniforms. OK if they send the child to an alternative school that's different.
I see today school crossing attendants, I never remember them when I was at school, and cars travelled faster back then. But clearly if there is a pavement and within 20 minutes walk around 1 miles, then to walk is acceptable.
But I look at my own village, and the pavements end, to walk from my house, to the local school, involves crossing 5 major roads, all within the 20 MPH speed limit, but only one crossing assistant. And it would be impossible to go to school in a wheel chair or mobility scooter without going on the road rather than the pavement.
But one minute we are complaining about a nanny state, and next the lack of the nanny state, so we need to use some common sense rather than hard and fast rules.
