Want to build a new house in my back garden

[The Natural Philosopher]

Well, I'll give you my take on low energy fridges.

Where does the extra energy go?

Into heating my house. OK I am paying 6p a Kw/h as against 2.5p for oil, but its not a net total loss.

So every bit of energy efficient electrical stuff has to have the so called gains offset by the amount of oil LESS I burn to keep warm.

Its the same with 'we could save the country XXX by half filling the kettle'

No, we could save the country about .6 of X at best.

In terms of boiler replacement, its an easy calculation. 2% off you energy bill for what - a couple of hundred quid.

In terms of e.g. double glazing its a phenomenal con. DG alone (if you remove the dramatic effects that sealing windows properly has on heat loss) never ever pays for itself, unless you have HUGE windows.

Floor and wall insulation is very marginal when fitted post build due to the expense of doing it - apart from dry lining which is very cost effective.

Only loft insulation is simple and cheap enough to do to be a complete no brainer for any householder.

[IMM]

If you say so....

[IMM]

Those who do, tend to have a south facing aspect with windows. The rear parts covered in earth would have light pipes which would contain bathrooms, storage, etc. Those who live in such homes love them.

[IMM]

Except in summer when the heat, which you have paid for, is totally unwanted.

2%?? Where did dyou get that from? My oh my.

[The Natural Philosopher]

Ah, but as any weak brained tosser (=IMM) knows, what is Good For The Environment Is Good For Humans....:-)

If the insulation is good enough, you don't need the passive solar gains anyway. 3 meters of earth is better than 60 mm of celotex. And IMMS hot air will keep him warm forever, and he can always burn his farts in winter.

And the house SHOULD be hermetically sealed - we don't want any precious oxygen being used by IMM, or and Co2 from his hot air, not to mention methane from his farts, contributing to global warming do we?

And if he suffocates, that's a huge win win for everyone. One less consumer of energy, and one source of moral, ecological and verbal pollution less? One less parasite. And the world a less crowded place.

Its so simple and sane, it has to happen :-)

[IMM]

< snip incoherent babble >

[Andy Hall]

Do they?

So they all have photocells on the roof? I don't think so.

ROTFL. It's one of the biggest "porches" I've ever seen..

.andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

[Tony Bryer]

Yes, the extra energy used does cut the amount needed for heating ... but only if you are heating the place. On a hot day like today the fridge is working harder and making the house less comfortable.

More like 10%. Doubtful economics on a small modern flat perhaps.

[Andy Hall]

There's nothing wrong with grade A appliances as long as they works as well as others, and generally they do.

The energy problems in California were created by an incompetent governor who signed up for ridiculous energy contracts which weren't necessary without understanding the consequences of his actions. Quite rightly, he got the sack.

.andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

[Bob]

The contracts caused problems with prices (from the way that the electricity market was structured) and caused a problem with prices (although California electricity prices were already 3 times what they are here, even before the changes).

The problem of supply in California is caused by the failure to approve the building of new power stations to meet rising demand from computers and air conditioners. We have the eco-nuts to thank for that.

Bob

[IMM]

You should know.

Only on one elevation. Pay attention. Focus for once.

You ROFLed at that?

Good isn't it.

[IMM]

Is Arnie going to shoot them if they F**k up again?

[IMM]

More like 20-25% in many cases, and 40% better when replacing an old cast iron effort.

[IMM]

More illogical ramblings. The so-called eco nuts were pressing for house that use no to little energy to cools and highly efficient appliances. They just didn't want nuclear that's all. The problem in California was not the supply problem, it was the energy usage problem. They unnecessarily consumed far too much. High energy appliances, and that includes a/c units too, and homes that do not require a/c and there would have been no problem.

In your warped world we could abandon all emission and energy regs and choke ourselves to death. Amazing from a man in country where in 1952 a London smog killed more than the blitz. Firstly, you need a history lesson ad they taught how emissions are current crippling us. Not to mention that we are running out of valuable oil. The Share of Iran said "oil is too valuable to burn". Yet we burn it with gay abandon.

[Nick Brooks]

I. afraid it's you who needs a history lesson

The accepted figure is that the London smog killed around 4000 people.

civilians are estimated to have died during the blitz, with over

50,000 injured, and around 130,000 houses destroyed.

bothering to check your facts before posting

[IMM]

The 1952 smog killed more in one day than in any single blitz raid.

[Andy Hall]

.. and Tooting won the FA Cup because they moved the goal posts....

.andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

[IMM]

>>

You are porky telling. Tooting have never won the FA Cup.

[Andy Hall]

You can do anything if you move the goal posts. You should know that.

.andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

[IMM]

Where the goalposts on wheels? Typical! A Sarf Lahndan team cheating.