Cratered!

When motoring journalists use that word ‘stalled’ I am always reminded of Inigo Montoya in The Princess Bride…. “You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.”

They’re probably going to stall all the way to at least 80% by 2030 ;-). Look at China, they’re they’ve stalled to 50% already.

‘Doublebase’ should be your other new friend.

….but it’s still something of a passion project given oil/gas:electricity price ratios in the UK. And the install period is lengthy. Decarbonising residential heat is certainly going to be a bigger challenge than electricity or transport in the UK.

Well. I’ve looked at the documents again and it appears I’ve confused forecast heat consumption in kWh with forecast electric consumption in kWh (bit confusing that the same measure is used). So that obviously brings down the running costs by whatever SCOP I achieve…..

I agree. (We are pretty parsimonious with the heating!). It shouldn’t be crazy different. Save that oil boilers are good for a short ‘blast’ in a way that heat pumps aren’t as well suited to. A bivalent system would in some ways be a natural evolution.

Thanks. That’s what I thought. They’re Heat Geek accredited. Flow temp 50 degrees, which sounds very warm. Problem is we chronically underheat our house and wear lots of jumpers. But MCS isn’t set up to allow for that and insists on 21 degrees C.

….Bit stumped by that. We won’t likely run it anything like as warm as specced, so need to better understand how that will lower flow temperature, drive up SCOP and reduce bills.

….annual SCOP of 3.3, which isn’t anything to write home about. (It’s a thin-walled wood-frames house built before decent insulation regs came in and very disruptive to retrofit.

….a quick rule of thumb calculation suggests if I were to heat the house to the level that MCS insists it is specced to in order to qualify for the £7,500 grant, then it would cost me about 6-8 times what it costs my oil boiler to run….