Copenhagen Climate Change Petition

[Hivemaker.]

Seven years Bros,then we are toast,because they will still be sat in Copenhagen talking about it,and collecting there bonuses.

 

[Brosville]

For MM - I'm sure you could look it up- 98% or more of the scientists who have the intimate knowledge of the facts seem to be in agreement that it does - why on earth should I even try to argue with such an expert on the subject?

I'd MUCH sooner you actually (for once) read a post, and responded to it's contents- I have a feeling you didn't even read it, let alone follow the links.........but then being such an expert you're obviously a thought-reader too!

 

[MuswellMetro]

For MM - I'm sure you could look it up- 98% or more of the scientists who have the intimate knowledge of the facts seem to be in agreement that it does - why on earth should I even try to argue with such an expert on the subject?

I'd MUCH sooner you actually (for once) read a post, and responded to it's contents- I have a feeling you didn't even read it, let alone follow the links.........but then being such an expert you're obviously a thought-reader too!

look i only have a diffcult with AGW, come across to Www.solarcycle24.com and look at the interaction of solar physist with AGW supporters....have i read the links no not this time but i have seen the links many tine before by AGW supporters on the solar site, it is an active two way discussion, boths side take notice of each other arguements, rather that just quote the media output on enviromnetal scientists of IPCC.

i have worked at Rothampstead, i agree that we need to do something urgent but not due to AGW We must stop the Housing spread and rape of the countryside,soil and wild life loss by mono cropping ,over use of pestiscide, wastefull use of precious hydro cardon for fuel, population growth out of control, rain run off and de forestation..yes and when i want to burn recyled wood, i find no you can not do that, you must burn de gassified fossil fuel in this smokeless zone...so who gets the Gas and polution...last Tesco cack of fuel came from China..i have not used it

lets see what weather the next 4 years brnigs ( within your 7 years to save the world) then i might re consider AGW but by 2032 i will most likey be dead ( if not frozen first)

Unti l then i will use Led Gu10 spots lights and fluro bulbs.. they save me money but i cannot dispose of them legaly due to the mercury ( y council does not recyle them) i have insulated my house with goverment grants but have stopped at solar electric pannells not becuase it not a good idea to sell baack to the electricty company surplus but the standard of workmna ship of the installers if so bad. i experimented with solar water heating but found the savings smaller than converting to a combi condesing boiler

it is only in my specialst field of solar physics i differ from you, i from my perpsesctive and many other solar phystists other than Hathway the prominat IPCC Solar physist who supports AGW and who got this solar 24 cylce prediction so so wrong..i and many other solar physists thinks its the suns magntic resonce thats be forcing climate change and it has dropped off the scale ...thats not the sun spot theory and solar insolation ( not insulation) debunked by many AGW supporters as not able to increase tempertures


anyway, i am keeping my bees warm this year especial in the lowest magnetic fields that occur in febuary in the northern hemisphere this year...probabley be a heat wave knowing my luck

 

[MuswellMetro]

a simplified version of the alternative theory to AGW on global warming....and the solar wind has just dropped to almost zero, In august it hardly reached escape velocity from the sun...

http://www.globalwarmingclassroom.info/earth_magnetosphere.htm

 

[oliver90owner]

MM, Brosville,

Yes, agreed it is 'likely' the over-population of the planet that is 'likely' helping to lead to the climate changes we have seen recently. There may well be other factors such as the solar winds etc but we are at least in agreement that over-population does in fact mean it is people (that's 'man') who are responsible for the decline of our environments around the globe. Too many people using too many resources. Too much food extracted from the oceans, acidification of the seas.

Yes, man - too many of us using up the world resources at too fast a rate. Man 'owning' too many cattle (measure of wealth in some parts) over-grazing the available crops and creating far too much extra methane at the same time. Free radicals in the upper atmosphere letting in the UV, more ozone at ground level increasing pollution. Every time it is man at fault. Man-made changes.

Extra millions (or even billions) using up fossil fuels (which locked all that carbon away for upwards of a couple hundred million years).

Until proven otherwise it must be prudent to assume it is man that has upset the equilibrium this last few hundred years. There is thus far no other animal or plant to blame for these changes other than humans. IF we (man) had not raped the Earth's resources we would, with all the technological advances, be able to determine it (climate change) was due to something else - solar activity being one possible option.

Regards, RAB

 

[MuswellMetro]

MM, Brosville,

Yes, agreed it is 'likely' the over-population of the planet that is 'likely' helping to lead to the climate changes we have seen recently.
Regards, RAB

perhaps it old mother earth trying to rid herself of excessive Human Varroa, i often wonderered if all these modern drugs and drought and famine relief just ratchet us further up the slope to anilation..is CCD in american just another clitch upwards as the american food mono culture experiment fails with starvation for millions

its like my allotement, at one time was in the Times for the highest lead pollution of any allotment in london due to lead pollution from road traffic...nice underused wild allotment, very good for Bees..now ,no lead in petrol, lots of new allotmenteers..clean no weeds, no wild flowers, lots of pesticide, lots on mono culture, lots of greenie people..no birds due to slug pellats and no nest site......not good for bees...lead, well i just washed the lettuce well

 

[jimbeekeeper]

IF we (man) had not raped the Earth's resources we would, with all the technological advances, be able to determine it (climate change) was due to something else - solar activity being one possible option.

Regards, RAB

To know where you are or where you are going, you need to know where you have come from.

The words "since records began" are often used, even with extrapolation etc, we are still limited in our baselines.

Is it not that our baseline is to short to get the correct data?

In the way medical diagnosis determines a heart attack, HIV or skin cancer for the only as recent as ~50 -70 years, but did people die of these things in the past but we just not have a name for them?

So now we have a new name (title) "Carbon foot print" but has this not been going on for a bit longer than humans?

Any way, I have just signed up to a 10 year bond, so I expect to be cashing it in in 10 years!

 

[oliver90owner]

MM,

Not sure about the lead in the soil. If it is still there, it is probably insoluble. Not many plants that will take up lead (or many of the other heavy metals?) in large quantities. So main problem is probably unwashed root crops and the heavy metal solubles leaching into the drinking water systems. One problem-area used to be fruits collected from roadside hedges - covered in tetra-ethyl lead and its combustion products.

A more dangerous pollutant is likely now to be dioxins - all man-made from combustion of chlorinated compounds such as PVC, and lots of chlorinated organic solvents. Some from combustion of coal, as well. Dioxins are the most carcinogenic substances made by man, I believe.

Regards, RAB

 

[m100]

but have stopped at solar electric pannells not becuase it not a good idea to sell baack to the electricty company surplus but the standard of workmna ship of the installers if so bad. i experimented with solar water heating but found the savings smaller than converting to a combi condesing boiler

Photovoltaics only make sense when you are off grid because of the remoteness of your location and where there is an extremely high cost of providing an electricity supply, in a city it makes no sense at all.

For instance, our association apiary has solar lighting, the output of the system and usage has been closely monitored. In the last 18 months it has generated in commercial terms (i.e what I currently pay per kWh with my electricity company at home) about 0.2% of the capital costs

The installation was free, the only cost being the cost of purchase of the solar panel, battery, charge controller, wiring, conduit, and 12v ballasts for the conventional fluorescent lights, all parts were purchase wholesale from mainstream branded sources (i.e no one hung low shanghai solar panels or batteries)

The panel is unavoidably shaded in summer by tree cover for a period in the later part of the day, but the system is adequately sized so it has kept the lights on in our apiary hut whenever they have been needed, all through the summer at least five times a month and at least once a month through the winter.

The payback period on power generated equates to around 600 years neglecting any interest. That is an extreme example and it takes no account of the convenience of not having to run a generator, maintain a generator, the cost of fuel, the noise of the generator and the replacement costs of a generator. The battery at current number of discharge cycles and depth of those discharges shows a life of about 40 years, the PV panel might last 30, on that basis it's cost less than we spend on chocolate biscuits and tea.

To run a cable to the nearest mains supply would have cost in the order of £10-15,000, something we couldn't *ever* afford.

It doesn't take much number crunching to show that most PV systems in Northern Europe will have a payback period longer than the predicted life of solar equipment and sometimes longer than the predicted life of the property they are fitted to!

But, whilst solar electricity is near hopeless, depending on your hot water demand homebrew solar water heating can be financially viable although anything 'professionally installed' - i.e. costing upwards of say £2000+ for a typical home doesn't every pay back the capital before the components reach the end of their useful life.

 

[MuswellMetro]

But, whilst solar electricity is near hopeless, depending on your hot water demand homebrew solar water heating can be financially viable although anything 'professionally installed' - i.e. costing upwards of say £2000+ for a typical home doesn't every pay back the capital before the components reach the end of their useful life.

on solar heating, yes the styrene, old radiator and passive system wotked, good savings and cost little but when the boiler went phut, they savings of a new condesin combi on demand only were five times the savings...may go for a pre heater high pressure system but again the parts are expensive as an old hot water cylinder may fail if used as the high pressure heat exchanger

 

[MuswellMetro]

duly signed!
Great shame the Exxon-funded lobbying that climate change isn't happening/isn't man-made is being believed by some amongst us!

so i assume you dont mind a Nuclear power staion next door to your bees, i have my worries this was all started by UKAEA or american equilvelent to get the government to biuld new Nuclear power station...which the one eyed scottish man will do now to stop global warming LOL...me well as i said before a Solar physcist but i was also a CND member in 1965..living in finsbury park and a friend of the late Monsignor kent, though i am a Quaker not catholic

 

[Brosville]

Lots of points to pick up on - nuclear? - too little, too late, and FAR too expensive to do properly, let alone the lunacy of placing them close to rising seas..........) Only reason it's being considered is the enormous power and "undue influence" (who said "brown envelopes"?) of the nuclear lobby
Solar hot water heating will always pay back it's embodied energy long before it knackers out (within months from memory, they capture gobbets of power), financial "payback" all depends on the fuel and system they're replacing (for a reasonably priced professional install - if it's an immersion heater it could be as little as a couple of years, if it's mains gas it could be 10 years). You can buy kits for around a grand that you can fit yourself/get a plumber to install, or fully fitted for under £3000.
Solar PV is expensive, but I'm "warming" to it in my old age -it's a truly "fit and forget" technology, that'll probably last 50 years - and if you "start at the other end" by paring electricity consumption first, it's amazing how small a system you can get by on (when caravanning in summer I'm well provided for with a 20w panel - pumps my water, runs radio, tv, 18w netbook, heater blower, charges mobiles/cameras etc........).
Usual quoted payback for embodied energy in pv panels is circa 3-5 years (according to type), which with a potential 50 year life is not at all bad - there are still pvs made in the 60's going strong at around 90% of their original efficiency.

 

[m100]

Solar hot water heating will always pay back it's embodied energy long before it knackers out (within months from memory, they capture gobbets of power), financial "payback" all depends on the fuel and system they're replacing (for a reasonably priced professional install - if it's an immersion heater it could be as little as a couple of years, if it's mains gas it could be 10 years). You can buy kits for around a grand that you can fit yourself/get a plumber to install, or fully fitted for under £3000.

Excuse the maths, but it's essential to show what a poor deal solar thermal systems can often be when taken on a direct replacement like for like usage basis. For example with a hot water tank of 900 x 450 mm 120 litre capacity. Heated by an immersion heater on off peak electricity which costs around 5p per kWh, assume you heat the entire tank every night from 'cold' 365 days a year.

The specific heat capacity of water is around 4.2kJ/kgK (ie you need
4.2kJoules to heat 1 kg (or 1 litre) of water by 1 degree Kelvin (same as 1 deg C)

1 Joule per second = 1W

Water incoming at an average of 10 deg C, water is then heated to 50 deg C which takes 4.2 x 122 x 40 = 20500J

Size the immersion element to allow heating over 7 hours = 25200 seconds

Therefore 20500 Joules / 25200 seconds = 0.81kW heating element required (neglecting any losses but lets assume the tank is well insulated.

Allow a 1kW element to cater for these losses.

This will cost 1kW x 7 hours x 5p/kWh = 35p a day to run.

Over a year that is 127 quid a year.

With 'professional' installs costing as you say under 3000 quid you can see why many thermal solar systems make no sense as that is 24 years @ 127 quid a year and exceeds the useful life of the system. Even as a DIY install costing say 1000 quid or so using the same type of collectors the 'pro's' use it is still marginal on a pure like for like replacement cost basis. If you heat the water with gas at circa 3- 3.5p per kWh the financial argument is even more marginal - that is just 90 quid a year for the gas. Of course energy costs will rise, hot water demand might be much more and you might even use more hot water in the middle of summer (not many people do though) and so some of the financial arguments for and against thermal solar will change.

Solar PV is expensive, but I'm "warming" to it in my old age -it's a truly "fit and forget" technology, that'll probably last 50 years - and if you "start at the other end" by paring electricity consumption first, it's amazing how small a system you can get by on (when caravanning in summer I'm well provided for with a 20w panel - pumps my water, runs radio, tv, 18w netbook, heater blower, charges mobiles/cameras etc........).Usual quoted payback for embodied energy in pv panels is circa 3-5 years (according to type), which with a potential 50 year life is not at all bad - there are still pvs made in the 60's going strong at around 90% of their original efficiency.

Paying back embodied energy isn't the only answer. PV's *never* cost the embodied energy price, every year for a decade or more there have been and continue to be claims of expected to be 'less than 1$ per watt' production costs The fact is you'll be paying substantially more than that. Figure on panel costs (with large pv panels) of around 3 quid a watt in the UK and about $3 per watt in the USA (typical rip off Britain)

Your caravan system as you say is used only in summer and for a very limited period, for use off grid it probably makes sense - although a small inverter petrol generator might increase your comfort level.


But taking your '20W system' extrapolate that to a 20W demand 24 hours a day 365 days a year.

If you were buying from the grid at say 12p per kWh that costs just 21 quid a year (and 80kg of CO2 if you are being picky, costing all of £1.36 to offset)

Now lets size a solar PV system to maintain this 20W demand round the clock all year.



20W x 8760hours per annum = 175kWh / annum

To produce 175kWh per annum would require a 205W pv panel

175/850(the sizing constant for the majority of the UK) = 0.205kW

A 205W pv panel from an established brand name supplier costs around £600



Now add a battery for a reserve of say 5 days at 20W constant demand because the sun doesn't always shine. (5 days being a typical accepted design reserve)

That is 2400Wh

A 205W pv panel has an open circuit voltage of substantially more than 12v and so will usually run on either a 24 v battery or in a multi pv string at anything up to 240v

Assume the use of a 24v battery, so that is 100Wh of battery capacity. But you can't discharge a battery to 'empty' and expect it to last.

Design for maximum of 50% depth of discharge (ideally you'd use 30% depth of discharge but this would cost even more)

That equates to 200Ah of battery capacity

So the required battery is 24v @ 200Ah, 2 x 12v 200Ah deep cycle AGM units cost around 300 quid for the pair.


Add on cost of a charge controller, with the cost of those batteries you better get a good one, so that is another 130 quid


That comes to a total of 1030 quid

Now add on the costs of cabling, pv mounts, a battery box vented to outside, maybe an inverter to supply 240v loads, or a 24v to 12v converter for your 12v loads - many 'large' pv's have by design greater than 24v output)

So to supply that miniscule 20W demand, round the clock you've now probably spent around 1100 quid - to save spending 21 quid that it would have cost from the grid.

.....or to put it another way you've just paid upfront for 50 years worth of electricity.


If British Gas, or nPower, or Eon or the like came to you and said, pay us up front for 50 years worth of electricity, you'd either mutter a few four letter words - or probably have to remortgage the house, ...and sell your grandmother, wife, and daughter into white slavery.

 

[Brosville]

I use the figures that are generally well-proven and accepted ones "in the industry"
PVs WILL pay back their embodied energy inside 3-5 years, solar hot water, usually within a few months - these are well-proved, and pretty unarguable!
My neighbour, who enjoys being known as a renowned skinflint is actually going to invest in solar hot water, when asked "why?" he pointed to a £500-plus bill for electricity for a quarter (2 profligate daughters and wife with an immersion heater)...... in his case, if he does it himself (£1000) it'll "pay for itself" within 18 months - that IS a fairly extreme case, but makes the point.
Many people confuse "embodied energy" with "payback" - embodied energy is repaying the cost of making the things (energy used), payback, as I said in an earlier post depends what you're supplanting!
PV does take a long time to repay it's capital cost, but in the perspective of 50 years and ever escalating electricity prices, they may well prove to be the bargain of the century.
I do design renewable systems, and give talks on "the truth about renewables, and how to avoid being ripped off"

The suggestion I make to everyone contemplating embarking on "renewables" is to "start at the other end", pare consumption to the bone, insulate to the hilt, THEN do your sums as to "what works for me" in capturing energy - if all you have is an immersion and a profligate family, solar hot water is a "must", if you're on mains gas, it may take up to 15 years for it to pay back, but don't forget that as soon as the embodied energy costs have been offset (pretty fast for solar hot water), you're doing your bit towards minimising fossil fuel consumption.
I also tend to go on about "thinking the unthinkable", things like "do you realise how little electricity you can actually get by on? (citing the caravan example), and "do you actually NEED a fridge/freezer, your great granny did without?"..... and for the electrically powered power showerers "do you realise you can shower, including your hair on under 5 litres of water at circa 40 degrees?" (any more is a luxury.......)
The whole point being to make people think about their consumption - we've got loads of bad habits, which when they're pointed out show that it makes a lot of sense to economise (even if you don't have a green conscience)

 

[Brosville]

ps - a thought occurred whilst walking the dogs - it is of course absolutely right and reasonable to "do the sums" carefully before embarking on renewables, and to have a rough idea of how well the chosen system will fulfill your criteria, but there is something else that I think should be factored in..........
Many people who've sneered "it's too expensive, it'll never pay back" tend to be precisely those people who don't turn a hair as their two cars lose £10k a year in depreciation, and they'd begrudge £15,000 on a pv system that'd mean no leccy bills for 50 years.............. (all it would take is for them to keep their cars a year or three longer, system bought.......) - we all buy tvs, video recorders, fridges, freezers (and heaven forfend, tumble dryers), washing machines, kitchen make-overs etc etc, and cheerfully chuck them in the bin after a few years, having never asked them to "pay back" - most of them may make life "easier" or more fun, but do clutter all to save using fossil fuels (usually help use it up though) -
SO, the point is - if we don't ask consumer goods to "pay back", why should we be sniffy about renewables costs that pay their debt back to the earth relatively swiftly.............?

 

[Frisbee]

My consumer goods have to pay me back Brosville..............I know what you are saying, but not everyone is like that.

Frisbee

 

[Brosville]

your fridge and tv pays you........... do tell more!

 

[Frisbee]

Well it's like this see.........being a bit of a skip diver, I tend to have other peoples cast offs, so my tv was given to me when someone else upgraded. I did buy the fridge, but over 11 years ago, so I think it has earnt it's keep. It won't be going till it breaks though. If my house still had its pantry then I'm sure I could do without one. My vehicle was bought second hand and will probably stay with me until unfit for service and then I'll buy another second hand one. I'm just saying that not everyone out there buys everything from new and regularly replaces regardless of need.

Frisbee

 

[Brosville]

got it! You're one of the unfortunately few who has the sense to do what you do....... I was having visions of a £1 in the slot meter on the telly and fridge so other family members had to cough up to "make it pay"...........
I must confess to having always been utterly gobsmacked at people who quite happily regularly buy new cars, and chop them in for another new one every 2-3 years, just so they've got the newest reg no..........
As for the pantry - fella after my own heart - my granny lived most of her life with an old-fashioned pantry, marble slab, north-facing perforated zinc window, and apart from "globby" milk in summer, no problems at all

 

[Heather]

My car, I had from new, is S reg and has 15000 on the clock so not too guilty