Scivillage.com Casual Discussion Science Forum

Full Version: What the real purpose of heat-pump hype is + Climate Deal: did nations keep promises?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Climate change: Have countries kept their promises? (data)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-55222890

EXCERPTS: Agreed by 196 parties in the French capital in December 2015, the Paris climate deal aims to keep the rise in global temperatures this century "well below 2C above pre-industrial levels and pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5C." Every one of the signatories has had to lodge a climate action plan with the UN to spell out what steps they are taking to curb carbon. Overall, according to a new assessment from global consultancy Systemiq, low-carbon solutions have been more successful in this period than many people realise. The growth in coal for energy outside of China has declined significantly.

"We have to translate what we can do into what we will do," said Lord Nicholas Stern, from the London School of Economics (LSE). "But a big part of that is understanding what is happening and that's why I think this report is important. It will change people's perspectives of what is possible and translate that into action."

So the big picture might be improving, but what about individual nations? Just ahead of the five year anniversary of the deal, we look at how five key countries have lived up to their promises under the pact.

The UK. As well as being the world's fifth largest economy, the UK is the incoming president of the Conference of the Parties or COP, the main UN climate negotiating forum, which will take place in Glasgow in November 2021. [...See the 2nd article below...] Has the UK lived up to its promises? The answer to this is mostly yes...

Australia. Australia matters because not only is it one of the biggest sources of fossil fuels, it is also a country highly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. The country is now the world's largest exporter of coal and gas, according to a recent study. [...] Has Australia lived up to its promises? While it is set to hit a rather low 2020 target set under a previous global agreement, its actions under the Paris climate agreement are not measuring up, according to experts...

The EU. The EU represents about a fifth of the world's economy - and was responsible for around 9% of the global share of CO2 emissions in 2019, the third largest emitter. Climate change is seen as a key issue for Europe, because it's an international problem where acting together makes sense to many citizens. [...] Has the EU lived up to its targets? Again, the answer is mostly yes...

China. China is key to solving the global problem with climate change, because it is the world's biggest contributor to the root cause, CO2 emissions. As China's economy rapidly expanded over the past two decades, using coal as their main energy source, their emissions have overtaken the US and now comprise around 28% of the global CO2 output. [...] Has China lived up to its promises? Again the answer is mostly yes, but with some caveats...

The Philippines. The Philippines is one of the countries suffering the most from the impacts of climate change. Like many other developing economies, the country is very keen to use energy to bring people out of poverty and raise living standards. [...] Has the Philippines lived up to its promises? Up until the Paris Agreement, the Philippines had not had any international requirements to curb its carbon. But in the Paris pact, it committed to cut its emissions by 70% below "business as usual" by 2030. According to the Climate Action Tracker analysis, its actions to date are compatible with keeping warming well below 2C this century... (MORE - details)


(UK) The heat-pump revolution: extracting power from the people (behind the data)
https://www.spiked-online.com/2020/12/10...he-people/

EXCERPTS: . . . There are broadly two sorts of heat pumps: ground-source (GSHPs) and air-source (ASHPs). Both extract heat from outside homes - by boring into the earth, which gets warmer the deeper one goes, or by pulling heat from the air, which works even in freezing winters. Both are powered by a modest amount of electricity. But, apart from the fossil fuels partly bound up with the electricity generation, both also eliminate the CO2 that conventional gas boilers emit. And, given the right kind of home insulation, some types of heat pumps are, in principle, cheaper to run than boilers.

So, why haven’t consumers been making the switch? The cons are considerable. They are hugely costly to set up [...] At the moment there are very few engineers trained to perform the tricky installation. In fact, 90 per cent of UK heating-systems engineers cannot even properly put in and start modern condensing gas boilers, despite the fact that they have been mandatory for 15 years. There will have to be a huge uptick in training if we are to come anywhere near the CCC’s targets for heat-pump installations.

The ground-source pumps are a non-starter for most consumers as you would really need to own your own land to have one installed. For the air-source pumps, which are aimed at the retrofitting market, the running costs are actually higher than regular boilers. And compared with GSHPs, ASHPs are not nearly as durable or easy to maintain... Of course, current costs aren’t everything. New technologies tend to fall in cost over the years ... But the CCC’s new report forecasts only a snail’s-paced 30 per cent reduction in the cost of heat pumps over the next 30 years.

[...] The CCC insists that homeowners must ‘shift towards positive long-term behaviours’. It believes that a ‘lack of public awareness and support for low-carbon heating is arguably the single greatest consumer barrier to achieving Net Zero’. In other words, the problem with heat pumps isn’t their costs, but the ignorance of the plebs.

Indeed, apart from greenish homes that are off Britain’s gas grid, in June the CCC said social housing, where people tend to be poorer, should be prioritised for heat-pump installation. And, in the usual sinister, vague but high-handed style, it called for ‘enabling measures’ to ‘strengthen monitoring and compliance’ of these residents. The chances are that government and local authorities will be watching us more than ever.

Many critics of HMG’s heat-pump plans say they are unachievable - which is true. But achievability isn’t really the point of the CCC’s diktat. Chris Sharp, the CCC’s CEO [...] made clear that the CCC’s proposals are about ‘political posturing’ - ‘and there’s nothing wrong with that’, he added. The main political purpose Sharp was talking about was Britain’s need to impress other governments, particularly at next November’s international jet-in for greens, the United Nations’ Conference Of the Parties (COP 26) in Glasgow.

British governments have indulged heat pumps, as an example of the ‘micro-generation’ of energy, since the mid 2000s. And the CCC’s targets for pumps are just as pie-in-the-sky as the ones produced under New Labour.

What has changed is the political climate. When the New Labour government stupidly backed heat pumps back in 2006, it gave its report, Our Energy Challenge, the feelgood subtitle ‘Power from the people’. But when you look at the CCC’s most recent report, it continually references the wishes of the UK’s undemocratic ‘Climate Assembly’. More importantly, it insists that the greatest challenges for Net Zero are not finding new energy technologies, but changing ‘individual behaviours’. Green technocrats are indeed all about taking ‘power from the people’. (MORE - details)
The heatpump has been doing good in this home so far.
Sp!ked Wrote:The climate technocrats’ posturing over heat pumps will be expensive, impractical and invasive.
Looks like redneck Americans are no more able to understand the English than the English are able to understand redneck Americans.
Quote:Green technocrats are indeed all about taking ‘power from the people'
Is forcing people to insulate their houses really a Chinese inspired plot which will take away our right to bear arms unless we act NOW? Maybe it is in the mind of a redneck American.

Without the politics it would just be a matter of going through the facts and figures quoted - probably not worth the time and effort involved.

Elte Wrote:The heatpump has been doing good in this home so far.
(Dec 10, 2020 09:36 PM)confused2 Wrote: [ -> ]
Sp!ked Wrote:The climate technocrats’ posturing over heat pumps will be expensive, impractical and invasive.
Looks like redneck Americans are no more able to understand the English than the English are able to understand redneck Americans.


Just to clarify for passerbys:

"Spiked" is a British internet magazine. The author James Woudhuysen is presumably this guy.

In the Channel 4 video mentioned, Chris Stark does say that it is (to some degree) political posturing for the global stage to help present a positive image that the UK is fulfilling its goals. In this case the extraordinary(?) aim of installing 600,000 new heat-pumps a year by 2028. The current level is only 40,000. He also mentions that it's probably due to them costing up to 20,000 pounds (additional issues like lack of expertise may or may not be addressed elsewhere).

Quote:
Quote:Green technocrats are indeed all about taking ‘power from the people'

Is forcing people to insulate their houses really a Chinese inspired plot which will take away our right to bear arms unless we act NOW? Maybe it is in the mind of a redneck American.


Again, to avoid passerby confusion: Article is in a UK "publication". Author seems to be British.

Quote:Without the politics it would just be a matter of going through the facts and figures quoted - probably not worth the time and effort involved.


Passerbys: Links, like to the video, in the article.

Quote:
Elte Wrote:The heatpump has been doing good in this home so far.

Quote recruited as a strawman, however, since the article doesn't knock that they work. Its criticism seems directed at the "unrealistic" policy slash target, whereof the above (Chris Stark) admits it serves the purpose of strategic political theatrics, blended with utopian(?) or wishful optimism(?) that those numbers can be achieved. Snippet: "think it's i think it's achievable ... yeah there's going to be a lot of work..."

Whether "the people" will suffer from such or not is indeed for locals on the island to butt heads over. Both sides will spin their own conclusions when it comes to that.
Well I'll be a monkey's uncle. Thanks CC. It seems there is a part of English culture I didn't even know about that is so like the bunch that can't believe Trump lost an election that I can't tell the difference. I stand informed.

Addressing the heat pump issue

Quote:As of 2023, gas (and other fossil fuel) boilers will be banished from newly built houses
( https://www.theecoexperts.co.uk/boilers/...boiler-ban )
There are rumours that this has been quietly forgotten but taking it as true for the present..
The options for the new home owner are nuclear, renewable or heat pump. Given the cost of a private nuclear power station and the unreliability of small scale renewables I'm guessing there'll be quite a few heat pumps installed in the next few years - like roughly as many as houses as built between 2023 and 2028 - 800,000?

So Mr Sp!ke is still left left wondering what kind of lunatic takes any notice of this eco nonsense?

Well.

Who'd a guessed but I happen to be renovating a property right now. I've secretly converted a garage into a workshop - well insulated by my standards (2" foam all round) - officially it should have had 4 inches of much better foam than I've used to the point where just being in there would have kept it warm. I can't fault the plan but I'm not likely to be around to appreciate the payback in terms of cost up front and energy saved so I've done it on the QT. If we sold the bungalow it would be an uncertified modification and would be reflected in the price we could ask.

Left to myself I would have installed an air heat pump but Mrs C2 was worried about the noise so we have a condensing gas boiler.

I would have installed underfloor heating (because its wonderful) but the effort of ripping up the 70 year old floorboards proved too much and I just added insulation under them - 2" of foam when 4" would be required for certification.

If I were a bit younger I would certainly have added the approved thickness of insulation.

But for Mrs C2 I would have gone for an air heat pump.

-C2.
As a rider..
I have my doubts about grants to improve (say) insulation. To get the grant of (say) £2,000 the work has to be done by an approved installer. The approved installer is likely to look at the grant as a bonus for being approved and will charge (say) £2,200 for £200 worth of work. When I need £200 worth of work doing I'm still young enough to do it myself thank you very much (does that make me a closet libertarian?).
A while back the UK had enough reserves of natural gas to last for the next 30 years. That was 50 years ago and we used it all up 20 years ago. Now we import virtually all our fuel. (We have massive coal reserves but regardless of that we import coal for reasons that are too complicated to go into here.)
-C2.