UK government considering breaking into people's homes to check their
boilers can take hydrogen.
Why not just cut off the supply from the outside?! They're a bunch of criminals!
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/21/hydrogen-boiler-home-heating-uk
"The safety issues involved with sending hydrogen through gas pipes mean upgrading any home would require shutting down the existing gas supply
for a whole district at a time to ensure the safety of all boilers,
including forced entry to any households that had not agreed to comply."
On 25/10/2023 23:27, Commander Kinsey wrote:
UK government considering breaking into people's homes to check their
boilers can take hydrogen.
Why not just cut off the supply from the outside?! They're a bunch of
criminals!
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/21/hydrogen-boiler-home-heating-uk
"The safety issues involved with sending hydrogen through gas pipes
mean upgrading any home would require shutting down the existing gas
supply for a whole district at a time to ensure the safety of all
boilers, including forced entry to any households that had not agreed
to comply."
No change. The utility companies already have the power to force entry
when there is a safety concern. However, when I worked for an
electricity board, it was usual to employ a locksmith, rather than a
door ram, and the property had to be left secure afterwards.
On 26/10/2023 11:00, Colin Bignell wrote:
On 25/10/2023 23:27, Commander Kinsey wrote:
UK government considering breaking into people's homes to check their
boilers can take hydrogen.
Why not just cut off the supply from the outside?! They're a bunch
of criminals!
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/21/hydrogen-boiler-home-heating-uk
"The safety issues involved with sending hydrogen through gas pipes
mean upgrading any home would require shutting down the existing gas
supply for a whole district at a time to ensure the safety of all
boilers, including forced entry to any households that had not agreed
to comply."
No change. The utility companies already have the power to force entry
when there is a safety concern. However, when I worked for an
electricity board, it was usual to employ a locksmith, rather than a
door ram, and the property had to be left secure afterwards.
Yes, but gas meters are usually accessible from outside the property
using a key in the gas company's possession.
On 26/10/2023 11:00, Colin Bignell wrote:
On 25/10/2023 23:27, Commander Kinsey wrote:
UK government considering breaking into people's homes to check their
boilers can take hydrogen.
Why not just cut off the supply from the outside?! They're a bunch of
criminals!
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/21/hydrogen-boiler-home-heating-uk
"The safety issues involved with sending hydrogen through gas pipes
mean upgrading any home would require shutting down the existing gas
supply for a whole district at a time to ensure the safety of all
boilers, including forced entry to any households that had not agreed
to comply."
No change. The utility companies already have the power to force entry
when there is a safety concern. However, when I worked for an
electricity board, it was usual to employ a locksmith, rather than a
door ram, and the property had to be left secure afterwards.
Yes, but gas meters are usually accessible from outside the property
using a key in the gas company's possession.
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 11:37:41 +0100, Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:
On 26/10/2023 11:00, Colin Bignell wrote:
On 25/10/2023 23:27, Commander Kinsey wrote:
UK government considering breaking into people's homes to check their
boilers can take hydrogen.
Why not just cut off the supply from the outside?! They're a bunch of >>>> criminals!
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/21/hydrogen-boiler-home-heating-uk
"The safety issues involved with sending hydrogen through gas pipes
mean upgrading any home would require shutting down the existing gas
supply for a whole district at a time to ensure the safety of all
boilers, including forced entry to any households that had not agreed
to comply."
No change. The utility companies already have the power to force entry
when there is a safety concern. However, when I worked for an
electricity board, it was usual to employ a locksmith, rather than a
door ram, and the property had to be left secure afterwards.
Yes, but gas meters are usually accessible from outside the property
using a key in the gas company's possession.
Mine isn't, it's in the garage.
But, in any case, it's not the meter which is the issue here. It's the boiler, which has to be checked to ensure it's compatible with hydrogen.
UK government considering breaking into people's homes to check their
boilers can take hydrogen.
Why not just cut off the supply from the outside?! They're a bunch of criminals!
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/21/hydrogen-boiler-home-heating-uk
"The safety issues involved with sending hydrogen through gas pipes mean upgrading any home would require shutting down the existing gas supply
for a whole district at a time to ensure the safety of all boilers,
including forced entry to any households that had not agreed to comply."
On 26/10/2023 11:37, Max Demian wrote:
On 26/10/2023 11:00, Colin Bignell wrote:
On 25/10/2023 23:27, Commander Kinsey wrote:
UK government considering breaking into people's homes to check
their boilers can take hydrogen.
Why not just cut off the supply from the outside?! They're a
bunch of criminals!
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/21/hydrogen-boiler-home-heating-uk
"The safety issues involved with sending hydrogen through gas
pipes mean upgrading any home would require shutting down the
existing gas supply for a whole district at a time to ensure the
safety of all boilers, including forced entry to any households
that had not agreed to comply."
No change. The utility companies already have the power to force
entry when there is a safety concern. However, when I worked for
an electricity board, it was usual to employ a locksmith, rather
than a door ram, and the property had to be left secure
afterwards.
Yes, but gas meters are usually accessible from outside the
property using a key in the gas company's possession.
That depends upon the age of the property. Mine was under the kitchen
sink until they replaced the mains, a few years ago. Even then, I had
to request an outside cabinet.
On 26/10/2023 11:37, Max Demian wrote:
On 26/10/2023 11:00, Colin Bignell wrote:
On 25/10/2023 23:27, Commander Kinsey wrote:
UK government considering breaking into people's homes to check their
boilers can take hydrogen.
Why not just cut off the supply from the outside?! They're a bunch
of criminals!
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/21/hydrogen-boiler-home-heating-uk
"The safety issues involved with sending hydrogen through gas pipes
mean upgrading any home would require shutting down the existing gas
supply for a whole district at a time to ensure the safety of all
boilers, including forced entry to any households that had not agreed
to comply."
No change. The utility companies already have the power to force entry
when there is a safety concern. However, when I worked for an
electricity board, it was usual to employ a locksmith, rather than a
door ram, and the property had to be left secure afterwards.
Yes, but gas meters are usually accessible from outside the property
using a key in the gas company's possession.
That depends upon the age of the property. Mine was under the kitchen
sink until they replaced the mains, a few years ago. Even then, I had to request an outside cabinet.
On 26/10/2023 11:00, Colin Bignell wrote:
On 25/10/2023 23:27, Commander Kinsey wrote:
UK government considering breaking into people's homes to check their
boilers can take hydrogen.
Why not just cut off the supply from the outside?! They're a bunch
of criminals!
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/21/hydrogen-boiler-home-heating-uk
"The safety issues involved with sending hydrogen through gas pipes
mean upgrading any home would require shutting down the existing gas
supply for a whole district at a time to ensure the safety of all
boilers, including forced entry to any households that had not agreed
to comply."
No change. The utility companies already have the power to force entry
when there is a safety concern. However, when I worked for an
electricity board, it was usual to employ a locksmith, rather than a
door ram, and the property had to be left secure afterwards.
Yes, but gas meters are usually accessible from outside the property
using a key in the gas company's possession.
Yes, but gas meters are usually accessible from outside the property
using a key in the gas company's possession.
No change. The utility companies already have the power to force entry
when there is a safety concern. However, when I worked for an
electricity board, it was usual to employ a locksmith, rather than a
door ram, and the property had to be left secure afterwards.
--
Colin Bignell
Many years ago British Gas <spit> announced they were replacing lead
pipes as they were, all of a sudden, apparently unsafe.
We'd just had major decorating works done and all of the pipework leading
to our meter was concealed behind a false wall.
The guy who pitched up (quite senior) was completely belligerent when I
told him I didn't want him ripping out work that cost us a lot of money
and he told us in no uncertain terms that if we refused them entry to do
the works they'd (a) condemn the pipework as being a "danger" (even though
it had been there for 50 years without ever being thought of as a danger)
and then having done so (b) force entry to effect the works needed to make >the property safe.
This procedure already happens when gas mains are replaced: it isn't safe to re-connect a house until the pipes are purged of air, so they have a procedure to visit each house to do this.
This procedure already happens when gas mains are replaced: it isn't safe to >re-connect a house until the pipes are purged of air, so they have a >procedure to visit each house to do this. In that instance they needed >access (meter under the stairs) to run the new plastic pipe through the old >iron one: presumably they would have cut me off if I'd refused them entry.
On 26 Oct 2023 12:07:44 +0100 (BST), Theo
<theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
This procedure already happens when gas mains are replaced: it isn't safe to >> re-connect a house until the pipes are purged of air, so they have a
procedure to visit each house to do this. In that instance they needed
access (meter under the stairs) to run the new plastic pipe through the old >> iron one: presumably they would have cut me off if I'd refused them entry.
That's happened in our street over the past few weeks. They've been
replacing all the mains pipes, and any individual supply pipe that needed
it. They gave us plenty of notice, and effectively booked an appointment
with each household to to do their pipe and reconnection. I don't know what would have happened if anyone had refused them access.
On 25/10/2023 23:27, Commander Kinsey wrote:
UK government considering breaking into people's homes to check their boilers can take hydrogen.
Why not just cut off the supply from the outside?! They're a bunch of criminals!
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/21/hydrogen-boiler-home-heating-uk
"The safety issues involved with sending hydrogen through gas pipes mean upgrading any home would require shutting down the existing gas supply
for a whole district at a time to ensure the safety of all boilers, including forced entry to any households that had not agreed to comply."
They had to do pretty much the same when they shifted from damp Town's
gas to the modern drier natural gas. The former was roughly 50:50 carbon monoxide and hydrogen so there is no reason why some moderate percentage
of mains gas cannot be hydrogen. You just have to be more careful since
pure hydrogen is explosive in a wider range of proportions with air.
They also do something similar if there is a supply failure and a chunk
of city gas network is shutdown or depressurised by a big leak.
It should be slightly easier this time although the Victorian piping is probably on its last legs and hydrogen gas is notorious for slowly
leaking into and through steel (more quickly through most other materials).
It will quite likely all end in tears or fractures but by then I expect
it will be someone else's problem to sort out...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_embrittlement
ISTR after the shift to natural gas there were quite a few cases of
exploding public call boxes due to gas leaks finding their way into the underground conduits and the pulse dial providing the spark!
I expect they will go for a 60:40 hydrogen to methane mix since any
higher proportion of hydrogen and things get a bit iffy. There is a
hydrogen refuelling station at Teesside Airport (God alone knows why!).
https://www.teessideinternational.com/news/teesside-airport-to-gain-hydrogen-refuelling-station-after-funding-success/
I wouldn't trust Innovate UK to ever back the right horse :(
--
Martin Brown
A few weeks ago, I listened to a BBC Radio 4 PM news report
about a town being selected for a Hydrogen Town pilot scheme,
whereby the current methane mains gas supply would be replaced
by a hydrogen gas supply, with a view to seeing whether that
would help towards achieving net zero in energy consumption. (The
town might have been Whitby or Redcar on Teesside, I can't recall.)
On thing they mentioned was that hydrogen molecules are much
smaller than methane molecules, so they can leak through a much
smaller pipework fault than methane molecules can. So they would
have to carefully double check all the existing supply pipe network.
On 25/10/2023 23:27, Commander Kinsey wrote:
UK government considering breaking into people's homes to check their
boilers can take hydrogen.
Why not just cut off the supply from the outside?! They're a bunch of
criminals!
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/21/hydrogen-boiler-home-heating-uk
"The safety issues involved with sending hydrogen through gas pipes mean
upgrading any home would require shutting down the existing gas supply
for a whole district at a time to ensure the safety of all boilers,
including forced entry to any households that had not agreed to comply."
They had to do pretty much the same when they shifted from damp Town's
gas to the modern drier natural gas. The former was roughly 50:50 carbon monoxide
and hydrogen so there is no reason why some moderate percentage
of mains gas cannot be hydrogen. You just have to be more careful since
pure hydrogen is explosive in a wider range of proportions with air.
They also do something similar if there is a supply failure and a chunk
of city gas network is shutdown or depressurised by a big leak.
It should be slightly easier this time although the Victorian piping is probably on its last legs and hydrogen gas is notorious for slowly
leaking into and through steel (more quickly through most other materials).
It will quite likely all end in tears or fractures but by then I expect
it will be someone else's problem to sort out...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_embrittlement
ISTR after the shift to natural gas there were quite a few cases of
exploding public call boxes due to gas leaks finding their way into the underground conduits and the pulse dial providing the spark!
I expect they will go for a 60:40 hydrogen to methane mix since any
higher proportion of hydrogen and things get a bit iffy.
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 15:40:01 +0100, Martin Brown
<'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:
On 25/10/2023 23:27, Commander Kinsey wrote:
UK government considering breaking into people's homes to check their
boilers can take hydrogen.
Why not just cut off the supply from the outside?! They're a bunch of
criminals!
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/21/hydrogen-boiler-home-heating-uk
"The safety issues involved with sending hydrogen through gas pipes mean >>> upgrading any home would require shutting down the existing gas supply
for a whole district at a time to ensure the safety of all boilers,
including forced entry to any households that had not agreed to comply."
They had to do pretty much the same when they shifted from damp Town's
gas to the modern drier natural gas. The former was roughly 50:50 carbon
monoxide
Why wasn't everyone dying? CO is very poisonous.
On 30/10/2023 07:48, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 15:40:01 +0100, Martin Brown
<'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:
On 25/10/2023 23:27, Commander Kinsey wrote:
UK government considering breaking into people's homes to check theirThey had to do pretty much the same when they shifted from damp Town's
boilers can take hydrogen.
Why not just cut off the supply from the outside?! They're a bunch of >>>> criminals!
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/21/hydrogen-boiler-home-heating-uk
"The safety issues involved with sending hydrogen through gas pipes mean >>>> upgrading any home would require shutting down the existing gas supply >>>> for a whole district at a time to ensure the safety of all boilers,
including forced entry to any households that had not agreed to comply." >>>
gas to the modern drier natural gas. The former was roughly 50:50 carbon >>> monoxide
Why wasn't everyone dying? CO is very poisonous.
It was a popular means for suicide. People turned the gas oven on
(without lighting it) and lay on their back with their head in the oven.
And John Christie "treated" his "patients" with town gas, the smell
disguised with Friar's Balsam.
On 30/10/2023 07:48, Commander Kinsey wrote:
Why wasn't everyone dying? CO is very poisonous.
It was a popular means for suicide. People turned the gas oven on
(without lighting it) and lay on their back with their head in the oven.
And John Christie "treated" his "patients" with town gas, the smell
disguised with Friar's Balsam.
One of the reasons why a lot of gas infrastructure companies are currently replacing a lot of their pipe network is to futureproof it for if/when hydrogen ever becomes a significant part of the supply.
On 30/10/2023 07:48, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 15:40:01 +0100, Martin Brown
<'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:
On 25/10/2023 23:27, Commander Kinsey wrote:
UK government considering breaking into people's homes to check theirThey had to do pretty much the same when they shifted from damp Town's
boilers can take hydrogen.
Why not just cut off the supply from the outside?! They're a bunch of >>>> criminals!
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/21/hydrogen-boiler-home-heating-uk
"The safety issues involved with sending hydrogen through gas pipes mean >>>> upgrading any home would require shutting down the existing gas supply >>>> for a whole district at a time to ensure the safety of all boilers,
including forced entry to any households that had not agreed to comply." >>>
gas to the modern drier natural gas. The former was roughly 50:50 carbon >>> monoxide
Why wasn't everyone dying? CO is very poisonous.
It was a popular means for suicide. People turned the gas oven on
(without lighting it) and lay on their back with their head in the oven.
On 30 Oct 2023 at 12:51:57 GMT, "Max Demian" <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:
On 30/10/2023 07:48, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 15:40:01 +0100, Martin Brown
<'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:
On 25/10/2023 23:27, Commander Kinsey wrote:
UK government considering breaking into people's homes to check their >>>>> boilers can take hydrogen.They had to do pretty much the same when they shifted from damp Town's >>>> gas to the modern drier natural gas. The former was roughly 50:50 carbon >>>> monoxide
Why not just cut off the supply from the outside?! They're a bunch of >>>>> criminals!
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/21/hydrogen-boiler-home-heating-uk
"The safety issues involved with sending hydrogen through gas pipes mean >>>>> upgrading any home would require shutting down the existing gas supply >>>>> for a whole district at a time to ensure the safety of all boilers,
including forced entry to any households that had not agreed to comply." >>>>
Why wasn't everyone dying? CO is very poisonous.
It was a popular means for suicide. People turned the gas oven on
(without lighting it) and lay on their back with their head in the oven.
And John Christie "treated" his "patients" with town gas, the smell
disguised with Friar's Balsam.
Town gas of course had a very strong smell without the need for any additives.
Even if the resident of a house couldn't smell it is likely that people in the street would raise the alarm before it reached toxic concentrations.
On 30/10/2023 12:51, Max Demian wrote:
On 30/10/2023 07:48, Commander Kinsey wrote:There is an old, probably mythical story, about someone who tried to
Why wasn't everyone dying? CO is very poisonous.
It was a popular means for suicide. People turned the gas oven on
(without lighting it) and lay on their back with their head in the oven.
And John Christie "treated" his "patients" with town gas, the smell
disguised with Friar's Balsam.
kill himself with the traditional means of sticking his head in a gas oven.
After a while he got bored, sat up, and lit a cigarette...
While I was looking for a source for that I came across
<https://www.jstor.org/stable/1147403>
Apparently the suicide rate dropped when town gas was replaced by
natural gas.
On Mon, 30 Oct 2023 17:21:34 -0000, Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 30/10/2023 12:51, Max Demian wrote:
On 30/10/2023 07:48, Commander Kinsey wrote:There is an old, probably mythical story, about someone who tried to
Why wasn't everyone dying? CO is very poisonous.
It was a popular means for suicide. People turned the gas oven on
(without lighting it) and lay on their back with their head in the oven. >>>
And John Christie "treated" his "patients" with town gas, the smell
disguised with Friar's Balsam.
kill himself with the traditional means of sticking his head in a gas oven. >>
After a while he got bored, sat up, and lit a cigarette...
While I was looking for a source for that I came across
<https://www.jstor.org/stable/1147403>
Any particular reason for the pretty <> round the link?
Apparently the suicide rate dropped when town gas was replaced by
natural gas.
Why should we prevent suicide? Denying someone the right to leave a
life they don't enjoy is not exactly humane.
On Mon, 30 Oct 2023 12:51:57 -0000, Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:
On 30/10/2023 07:48, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 15:40:01 +0100, Martin Brown
<'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:
On 25/10/2023 23:27, Commander Kinsey wrote:
UK government considering breaking into people's homes to check their >>>>> boilers can take hydrogen.
Why not just cut off the supply from the outside?! They're a bunch of >>>>> criminals!
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/21/hydrogen-boiler-home-heating-uk
"The safety issues involved with sending hydrogen through gas pipes
mean
upgrading any home would require shutting down the existing gas supply >>>>> for a whole district at a time to ensure the safety of all boilers,
including forced entry to any households that had not agreed to
comply."
They had to do pretty much the same when they shifted from damp Town's >>>> gas to the modern drier natural gas. The former was roughly 50:50
carbon
monoxide
Why wasn't everyone dying? CO is very poisonous.
It was a popular means for suicide. People turned the gas oven on
(without lighting it) and lay on their back with their head in the oven.
Doesn't methane kill you then? I thought you could still do so.
On 01/11/2023 04:43, Vladimir Putin wrote:
On Mon, 30 Oct 2023 12:51:57 -0000, Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com>
wrote:
On 30/10/2023 07:48, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 15:40:01 +0100, Martin Brown
<'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:
On 25/10/2023 23:27, Commander Kinsey wrote:
UK government considering breaking into people's homes to check their >>>>>> boilers can take hydrogen.
Why not just cut off the supply from the outside?! They're a bunch of >>>>>> criminals!
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/21/hydrogen-boiler-home-heating-uk
"The safety issues involved with sending hydrogen through gas pipes >>>>>> mean
upgrading any home would require shutting down the existing gas supply >>>>>> for a whole district at a time to ensure the safety of all boilers, >>>>>> including forced entry to any households that had not agreed to
comply."
They had to do pretty much the same when they shifted from damp Town's >>>>> gas to the modern drier natural gas. The former was roughly 50:50
carbon
monoxide
Why wasn't everyone dying? CO is very poisonous.
It was a popular means for suicide. People turned the gas oven on
(without lighting it) and lay on their back with their head in the oven.
Doesn't methane kill you then? I thought you could still do so.
Any gas breathed on its own will kill you apart from oxygen (e.g. helium
or laughing gas). It's the presence of CO2 that stimulates breathing,
not the lack of O2.
On 1 Nov 2023 at 13:50:15 GMT, "Max Demian" <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:
On 01/11/2023 04:43, Vladimir Putin wrote:
On Mon, 30 Oct 2023 12:51:57 -0000, Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com>
wrote:
On 30/10/2023 07:48, Commander Kinsey wrote:Doesn't methane kill you then? I thought you could still do so.
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 15:40:01 +0100, Martin Brown
<'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:
On 25/10/2023 23:27, Commander Kinsey wrote:
UK government considering breaking into people's homes to check their >>>>>>> boilers can take hydrogen.
Why not just cut off the supply from the outside?! They're a bunch of >>>>>>> criminals!
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/21/hydrogen-boiler-home-heating-uk
"The safety issues involved with sending hydrogen through gas pipes >>>>>>> mean
upgrading any home would require shutting down the existing gas supply >>>>>>> for a whole district at a time to ensure the safety of all boilers, >>>>>>> including forced entry to any households that had not agreed to
comply."
They had to do pretty much the same when they shifted from damp Town's >>>>>> gas to the modern drier natural gas. The former was roughly 50:50
carbon
monoxide
Why wasn't everyone dying? CO is very poisonous.
It was a popular means for suicide. People turned the gas oven on
(without lighting it) and lay on their back with their head in the oven. >>>
Any gas breathed on its own will kill you apart from oxygen (e.g. helium
or laughing gas). It's the presence of CO2 that stimulates breathing,
not the lack of O2.
Methane is lighter than air so it will tend to rise and pull in air behind it.
So it's not a very efficient way to aphyxiate people.
On Mon, 30 Oct 2023 12:51:57 -0000, Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:
Why wasn't everyone dying? CO is very poisonous.
It was a popular means for suicide. People turned the gas oven on
(without lighting it) and lay on their back with their head in the oven.
Doesn't methane kill you then? I thought you could still do so.
Why should we prevent suicide?
Denying someone the right to leave a life they don't enjoy
is not exactly humane.
Why should we prevent suicide? Denying someone the right to leave a life they don't enjoy is not exactly humane.
On 1 Nov 2023 at 13:50:15 GMT, "Max Demian" <max_demian@bigfoot.com>
wrote:
On 01/11/2023 04:43, Vladimir Putin wrote:
On Mon, 30 Oct 2023 12:51:57 -0000, Max Demian
<max_demian@bigfoot.com>
wrote:
On 30/10/2023 07:48, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 15:40:01 +0100, Martin Brown
<'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:
On 25/10/2023 23:27, Commander Kinsey wrote:
UK government considering breaking into people's homes to check
their boilers can take hydrogen.
Why not just cut off the supply from the outside?! They're a
bunch of criminals!
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/21/hydrogen- boiler-home-heating-uk
"The safety issues involved with sending hydrogen through gas
pipes mean upgrading any home would require shutting down the
existing gas supply for a whole district at a time to ensure the >>>>>>> safety of all boilers,
including forced entry to any households that had not agreed to
comply."
They had to do pretty much the same when they shifted from damp
Town's gas to the modern drier natural gas. The former was roughly >>>>>> 50:50 carbon monoxide
Why wasn't everyone dying? CO is very poisonous.
It was a popular means for suicide. People turned the gas oven on
(without lighting it) and lay on their back with their head in the
oven.
Doesn't methane kill you then? I thought you could still do so.
Any gas breathed on its own will kill you apart from oxygen (e.g.
helium or laughing gas). It's the presence of CO2 that stimulates
breathing, not the lack of O2.
Methane is lighter than air so it will tend to rise and pull in air
behind it.
So it's not a very efficient way to aphyxiate people.
On Wednesday, 1 November 2023 at 09:09:04 UTC, Vladimir Putin wrote:
Why should we prevent suicide? Denying someone the right to leave a
life they don't enjoy is not exactly humane.
Agreed but today, apparently, several broadband providers in the UK have blocked access to a pro-suicide website.
I misguidedly believed our elected head was Rishi Sunak but it seems to
be Kim-Jong-Un.
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 11:37:41 +0100, Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:
On 26/10/2023 11:00, Colin Bignell wrote:
On 25/10/2023 23:27, Commander Kinsey wrote:
UK government considering breaking into people's homes to check their
boilers can take hydrogen.
Why not just cut off the supply from the outside?! They're a bunch of >>>> criminals!
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/21/hydrogen-boiler-home-heating-uk
"The safety issues involved with sending hydrogen through gas pipes
mean upgrading any home would require shutting down the existing gas
supply for a whole district at a time to ensure the safety of all
boilers, including forced entry to any households that had not agreed
to comply."
No change. The utility companies already have the power to force entry
when there is a safety concern. However, when I worked for an
electricity board, it was usual to employ a locksmith, rather than a
door ram, and the property had to be left secure afterwards.
Yes, but gas meters are usually accessible from outside the property
using a key in the gas company's possession.
Mine isn't, it's in the garage.
But, in any case, it's not the meter which is the issue here. It's the boiler, which has to be checked to ensure it's compatible with hydrogen.
On 25/10/2023 23:27, Commander Kinsey wrote:
UK government considering breaking into people's homes to check their
boilers can take hydrogen.
Why not just cut off the supply from the outside?! They're a bunch of
criminals!
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/21/hydrogen-boiler-home-heating-uk
"The safety issues involved with sending hydrogen through gas pipes mean
upgrading any home would require shutting down the existing gas supply
for a whole district at a time to ensure the safety of all boilers,
including forced entry to any households that had not agreed to comply."
No change. The utility companies already have the power to force entry
when there is a safety concern. However, when I worked for an
electricity board, it was usual to employ a locksmith, rather than a
door ram, and the property had to be left secure afterwards.
On 26/10/2023 11:37 am, Max Demian wrote:
On 26/10/2023 11:00, Colin Bignell wrote:
On 25/10/2023 23:27, Commander Kinsey wrote:
UK government considering breaking into people's homes to check their
boilers can take hydrogen.
Why not just cut off the supply from the outside?! They're a bunch
of criminals!
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/21/hydrogen-boiler-home-heating-uk
"The safety issues involved with sending hydrogen through gas pipes
mean upgrading any home would require shutting down the existing gas
supply for a whole district at a time to ensure the safety of all
boilers, including forced entry to any households that had not agreed
to comply."
No change. The utility companies already have the power to force entry
when there is a safety concern. However, when I worked for an
electricity board, it was usual to employ a locksmith, rather than a
door ram, and the property had to be left secure afterwards.
Yes, but gas meters are usually accessible from outside the property
using a key in the gas company's possession.
I am not aware of a single property in this road (or in any thoroughfare where I have previously lived) where that is the case.
New build properties of the last couple of decades, maybe (but not
always even then).
On 26 Oct 2023 at 12:16:26 BST, "Colin Bignell" <cpb@bignellREMOVETHIS.me.uk> wrote:
On 26/10/2023 11:37, Max Demian wrote:
On 26/10/2023 11:00, Colin Bignell wrote:
On 25/10/2023 23:27, Commander Kinsey wrote:
UK government considering breaking into people's homes to check their >>>>> boilers can take hydrogen.
Why not just cut off the supply from the outside?! They're a bunch
of criminals!
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/21/hydrogen-boiler-home-heating-uk
"The safety issues involved with sending hydrogen through gas pipes
mean upgrading any home would require shutting down the existing gas >>>>> supply for a whole district at a time to ensure the safety of all
boilers, including forced entry to any households that had not agreed >>>>> to comply."
No change. The utility companies already have the power to force entry >>>> when there is a safety concern. However, when I worked for an
electricity board, it was usual to employ a locksmith, rather than a
door ram, and the property had to be left secure afterwards.
Yes, but gas meters are usually accessible from outside the property
using a key in the gas company's possession.
That depends upon the age of the property. Mine was under the kitchen
sink until they replaced the mains, a few years ago. Even then, I had to
request an outside cabinet.
Mine used to under the sink too. And the only way to read it was to pull out the washing machine and peer over the end of it with a torch.
I was really glad when I found out the meter reader from Briitsh Gas was a fake, and probably seeing if the house was worth burgling, after he'd had to go through that.
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 12:16:26 +0100
Colin Bignell <cpb@bignellREMOVETHIS.me.uk> wrote:
On 26/10/2023 11:37, Max Demian wrote:
On 26/10/2023 11:00, Colin Bignell wrote:
On 25/10/2023 23:27, Commander Kinsey wrote:
UK government considering breaking into people's homes to check
their boilers can take hydrogen.
Why not just cut off the supply from the outside?! They're a
bunch of criminals!
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/21/hydrogen-boiler-home-heating-uk
"The safety issues involved with sending hydrogen through gas
pipes mean upgrading any home would require shutting down the
existing gas supply for a whole district at a time to ensure the
safety of all boilers, including forced entry to any households
that had not agreed to comply."
No change. The utility companies already have the power to force
entry when there is a safety concern. However, when I worked for
an electricity board, it was usual to employ a locksmith, rather
than a door ram, and the property had to be left secure
afterwards.
Yes, but gas meters are usually accessible from outside the
property using a key in the gas company's possession.
That depends upon the age of the property. Mine was under the kitchen
sink until they replaced the mains, a few years ago. Even then, I had
to request an outside cabinet.
You guys are lucky, there is no mains gas in my village. The next
village has it, and a Cadent gas engineer prominently parks his works
van outside his house here but there is no gas.
There used to be a gas plant in the village, the pipe that brought it
to this house, that was originally a pub, is still there outside the
back door.
On 26/10/2023 13:47, Mark Goodge wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 11:37:41 +0100, Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com>
wrote:
On 26/10/2023 11:00, Colin Bignell wrote:
On 25/10/2023 23:27, Commander Kinsey wrote:
UK government considering breaking into people's homes to check their >>>>> boilers can take hydrogen.
Why not just cut off the supply from the outside?! They're a bunch of >>>>> criminals!
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/21/hydrogen-boiler-home-heating-uk
"The safety issues involved with sending hydrogen through gas pipes
mean upgrading any home would require shutting down the existing gas >>>>> supply for a whole district at a time to ensure the safety of all
boilers, including forced entry to any households that had not agreed >>>>> to comply."
No change. The utility companies already have the power to force entry >>>> when there is a safety concern. However, when I worked for an
electricity board, it was usual to employ a locksmith, rather than a
door ram, and the property had to be left secure afterwards.
Yes, but gas meters are usually accessible from outside the property
using a key in the gas company's possession.
Mine isn't, it's in the garage.
But, in any case, it's not the meter which is the issue here. It's the
boiler, which has to be checked to ensure it's compatible with hydrogen.
More generally, to check that there is no danger from it: in exactly the
same way they would force entry if somebody reported a smell of gas and nobody answered the door.
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 16:54:21 +0100, Davey <davey@example.invalid> wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 12:16:26 +0100
Colin Bignell <cpb@bignellREMOVETHIS.me.uk> wrote:
On 26/10/2023 11:37, Max Demian wrote:
On 26/10/2023 11:00, Colin Bignell wrote:
On 25/10/2023 23:27, Commander Kinsey wrote:
UK government considering breaking into people's homes to check
their boilers can take hydrogen.
Why not just cut off the supply from the outside?!Ā They're a
bunch of criminals!
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/21/hydrogen-boiler-home-heating-uk
"The safety issues involved with sending hydrogen through gas
pipes mean upgrading any home would require shutting down the
existing gas supply for a whole district at a time to ensure the
safety of all boilers, including forced entry to any households
that had not agreed to comply."
No change. The utility companies already have the power to force
entry when there is a safety concern. However, when I worked for
an electricity board, it was usual to employ a locksmith, rather
than a door ram, and the property had to be left secure
afterwards.
Yes, but gas meters are usually accessible from outside the
property using a key in the gas company's possession.
That depends upon the age of the property. Mine was under the kitchen
sink until they replaced the mains, a few years ago. Even then, I had
to request an outside cabinet.
You guys are lucky, there is no mains gas in my village. The next
village has it, and a Cadent gas engineer prominently parks his works
van outside his house here but there is no gas.
There used to be a gas plant in the village, the pipe that brought it
to this house, that was originally a pub, is still there outside the
back door.
How is it lucky to have gas? It's old technology.
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 16:54:21 +0100, Davey <davey@example.invalid> wrote:
You guys are lucky, there is no mains gas in my village. The next
village has it, and a Cadent gas engineer prominently parks his works
van outside his house here but there is no gas.
There used to be a gas plant in the village, the pipe that brought it
to this house, that was originally a pub, is still there outside the
back door.
How is it lucky to have gas? It's old technology.
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 13:47:28 +0100, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
But, in any case, it's not the meter which is the issue here. It's the
boiler, which has to be checked to ensure it's compatible with hydrogen.
No it doesn't. If you can't access my boiler, you shut off the gas from the outside.
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 11:00:46 +0100, Colin Bignell <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:
No change. The utility companies already have the power to force entry
when there is a safety concern. However, when I worked for an
electricity board, it was usual to employ a locksmith, rather than a
door ram, and the property had to be left secure afterwards.
And when my parrots escape when you open the door, what then?
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 16:54:21 +0100, Davey <davey@example.invalid> wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 12:16:26 +0100
Colin Bignell <cpb@bignellREMOVETHIS.me.uk> wrote:
On 26/10/2023 11:37, Max Demian wrote:
On 26/10/2023 11:00, Colin Bignell wrote:
On 25/10/2023 23:27, Commander Kinsey wrote:
UK government considering breaking into people's homes to check
their boilers can take hydrogen.
Why not just cut off the supply from the outside?!Ā They're a
bunch of criminals!
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/21/hydrogen-boiler-home-heating-uk
"The safety issues involved with sending hydrogen through gas
pipes mean upgrading any home would require shutting down the
existing gas supply for a whole district at a time to ensure the
safety of all boilers, including forced entry to any households
that had not agreed to comply."
No change. The utility companies already have the power to force
entry when there is a safety concern. However, when I worked for
an electricity board, it was usual to employ a locksmith, rather
than a door ram, and the property had to be left secure
afterwards.
Yes, but gas meters are usually accessible from outside the
property using a key in the gas company's possession.
That depends upon the age of the property. Mine was under the kitchen
sink until they replaced the mains, a few years ago. Even then, I had
to request an outside cabinet.
You guys are lucky, there is no mains gas in my village. The next
village has it, and a Cadent gas engineer prominently parks his works
van outside his house here but there is no gas.
There used to be a gas plant in the village, the pipe that brought it
to this house, that was originally a pub, is still there outside the
back door.
How is it lucky to have gas? It's old technology.
On Sun, 12 Nov 2023 01:41:02 -0000, "Vladimir Putin" <russia@will.rule> wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 13:47:28 +0100, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
But, in any case, it's not the meter which is the issue here. It's the
boiler, which has to be checked to ensure it's compatible with hydrogen.
No it doesn't. If you can't access my boiler, you shut off the gas from the outside.
Fine, if that's what you want. Might get a bit chilly in winter, though, and if you've got a gas hob then cooking is going to be problematic. The proverb about noses and faces comes to mind.
On 12/11/2023 01:44, Vladimir Putin wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 16:54:21 +0100, Davey <davey@example.invalid> wrote:
You guys are lucky, there is no mains gas in my village. The next
village has it, and a Cadent gas engineer prominently parks his works
van outside his house here but there is no gas.
There used to be a gas plant in the village, the pipe that brought it
to this house, that was originally a pub, is still there outside the
back door.
How is it lucky to have gas? It's old technology.
Older (slightly), but good.
Gas is easily stored and can be transported
to houses with minimal losses;
especially good for space and water
heating.
Electricity generation from gas is inherently inefficient from
thermodynamic considerations and losses in power lines.
These losses can
only be (partly) recovered with heat pumps, which is an immature
technology and installation is complex, especially for retrofitting.
Renewable technologies such as solar and wind power are intermittent;
nuclear is only suitable for base level generation.
On 12/11/2023 01:44, Vladimir Putin wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 16:54:21 +0100, Davey <davey@example.invalid> wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 12:16:26 +0100
Colin Bignell <cpb@bignellREMOVETHIS.me.uk> wrote:
On 26/10/2023 11:37, Max Demian wrote:
Yes, but gas meters are usually accessible from outside the
property using a key in the gas company's possession.
That depends upon the age of the property. Mine was under the kitchen
sink until they replaced the mains, a few years ago. Even then, I had
to request an outside cabinet.
You guys are lucky, there is no mains gas in my village. The next
village has it, and a Cadent gas engineer prominently parks his works
van outside his house here but there is no gas.
There used to be a gas plant in the village, the pipe that brought it
to this house, that was originally a pub, is still there outside the
back door.
How is it lucky to have gas? It's old technology.
It is also way cheaper than any of the alternatives for space heating.
Oil is incredibly expensive by comparison and solid fuel requires a lot
of manual handling. My village also has no gas supply despite being in
the danger zone of one of the UK's highest pressure gas pipelines.
Heat pumps are fine provided that there *is* a reliable electricity
supply - that is by no means certain where I live especially in winter.
On Sun, 12 Nov 2023 01:42:26 -0000, "Vladimir Putin" <russia@will.rule> wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 11:00:46 +0100, Colin Bignell <cpb@bignellremovethis.me.uk> wrote:
No change. The utility companies already have the power to force entry
when there is a safety concern. However, when I worked for an
electricity board, it was usual to employ a locksmith, rather than a
door ram, and the property had to be left secure afterwards.
And when my parrots escape when you open the door, what then?
You'll regret your foolishness in letting them fly free when you're not in the house.
It's only 90% efficient. Electricity can be 300% efficient.
On 13/11/2023 08:31, Vladimir Putin wrote:
It's only 90% efficient. Electricity can be 300% efficient.
I think the writer needs to study physics (and maths would help.)
On 13 Nov 2023 at 09:58:15 GMT, ""Les. Hayward"" <les@nospam.invalid> wrote:
On 13/11/2023 08:31, Vladimir Putin wrote:
It's only 90% efficient. Electricity can be 300% efficient.
I think the writer needs to study physics (and maths would help.)
I think you need to study what heat pumps do. No, I don't fully understand it,
but I believe what people who apparently do say.
On 13/11/2023 10:37, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 13 Nov 2023 at 09:58:15 GMT, ""Les. Hayward"" <les@nospam.invalid> wrote: >>
On 13/11/2023 08:31, Vladimir Putin wrote:
It's only 90% efficient. Electricity can be 300% efficient.
I think the writer needs to study physics (and maths would help.)
I think you need to study what heat pumps do. No, I don't fully understand it,
but I believe what people who apparently do say.
If any of them say something is 300% efficient I wouldn't believe it.
If they just said 3 times better than something else, that is different.
On 13/11/2023 10:37, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 13 Nov 2023 at 09:58:15 GMT, ""Les. Hayward"" <les@nospam.invalid>
wrote:
On 13/11/2023 08:31, Vladimir Putin wrote:
It's only 90% efficient. Electricity can be 300% efficient.
I think the writer needs to study physics (and maths would help.)
I think you need to study what heat pumps do. No, I don't fully
understand it,
but I believe what people who apparently do say.
If any of them say something is 300% efficient I wouldn't believe it.
If they just said 3 times better than something else, that is different.
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 13:47:28 +0100, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 11:37:41 +0100, Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com>
wrote:
On 26/10/2023 11:00, Colin Bignell wrote:
On 25/10/2023 23:27, Commander Kinsey wrote:
UK government considering breaking into people's homes to check their >>>>> boilers can take hydrogen.
Why not just cut off the supply from the outside?! They're a bunch of >>>>> criminals!
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/21/hydrogen-boiler-home-heating-uk
"The safety issues involved with sending hydrogen through gas pipes
mean upgrading any home would require shutting down the existing gas >>>>> supply for a whole district at a time to ensure the safety of all
boilers, including forced entry to any households that had not agreed >>>>> to comply."
No change. The utility companies already have the power to force entry >>>> when there is a safety concern. However, when I worked for an
electricity board, it was usual to employ a locksmith, rather than a
door ram, and the property had to be left secure afterwards.
Yes, but gas meters are usually accessible from outside the property
using a key in the gas company's possession.
Mine isn't, it's in the garage.
But, in any case, it's not the meter which is the issue here. It's the
boiler, which has to be checked to ensure it's compatible with hydrogen.
No it doesn't. If you can't access my boiler, you shut off the gas from
the outside.
On 13 Nov 2023 at 09:58:15 GMT, ""Les. Hayward"" <les@nospam.invalid> wrote:
On 13/11/2023 08:31, Vladimir Putin wrote:
It's only 90% efficient. Electricity can be 300% efficient.
I think the writer needs to study physics (and maths would help.)
I think you need to study what heat pumps do. No, I don't fully understand it, >but I believe what people who apparently do say.
On 12/11/2023 01:41, Vladimir Putin wrote:
No it doesn't. If you can't access my boiler, you shut off the gas from
the outside.
I suspect some places only have a gas valve inside the property next to
the meter.
On 13/11/2023 11:44, kat wrote:
On 13/11/2023 10:37, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 13 Nov 2023 at 09:58:15 GMT, ""Les. Hayward"" <les@nospam.invalid>
wrote:
On 13/11/2023 08:31, Vladimir Putin wrote:
It's only 90% efficient. Electricity can be 300% efficient.
I think the writer needs to study physics (and maths would help.)
I think you need to study what heat pumps do. No, I don't fully
understand it,
but I believe what people who apparently do say.
If any of them say something is 300% efficient I wouldn't believe it.
If they just said 3 times better than something else, that is different.
It means that a heat pump can produce three times as much heat compared
to the electrical energy input, as it takes heat from the environment.
Which is true, with many provisos.
On Sun, 12 Nov 2023 13:26:34 -0000, Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:
On 12/11/2023 01:44, Vladimir Putin wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 16:54:21 +0100, Davey <davey@example.invalid> wrote:
You guys are lucky, there is no mains gas in my village. The next
village has it, and a Cadent gas engineer prominently parks his works
van outside his house here but there is no gas.
There used to be a gas plant in the village, the pipe that brought it
to this house, that was originally a pub, is still there outside the
back door.
How is it lucky to have gas? It's old technology.
Older (slightly), but good.
I can't figure out how to run my computer on gas. Windows refuses to boot.
Gas is easily stored and can be transported
to houses with minimal losses;
Yeah, like it never leaks. Like I can't smell it as I walk past those strange big steel boxes which hiss.
especially good for space and water
heating.
It's only 90% efficient. Electricity can be 300% efficient.
Electricity generation from gas is inherently inefficient from
thermodynamic considerations and losses in power lines.
Then don't make it from gas. So much wind we're not using.
These losses can
only be (partly) recovered with heat pumps, which is an immature
technology and installation is complex, especially for retrofitting.
I installed mine myself. Couple of pipes to attach and a couple of
holes in the wall to drill, simple.
Renewable technologies such as solar and wind power are intermittent;
Only if you think in isolation. It's always windy somewhere.
nuclear is only suitable for base level generation.
What? Nuclear is perfect for all generation (until uranium runs out).
On Sun, 12 Nov 2023 13:13:40 -0000, Martin Brown
<'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:
Oil is incredibly expensive by comparison and solid fuel requires a lot
of manual handling. My village also has no gas supply despite being in
the danger zone of one of the UK's highest pressure gas pipelines.
Thanks for giving a good reason to avoid gas. I repeat your words -
"danger zone".
Heat pumps are fine provided that there *is* a reliable electricity
supply - that is by no means certain where I live especially in winter.
It's reliable in 99% of the country. If it isn't where you live, get a
UPS and wire some huge batteries to it.
On 13/11/2023 11:56, Max Demian wrote:
On 13/11/2023 11:44, kat wrote:
On 13/11/2023 10:37, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 13 Nov 2023 at 09:58:15 GMT, ""Les. Hayward""
<les@nospam.invalid> wrote:
On 13/11/2023 08:31, Vladimir Putin wrote:
It's only 90% efficient. Electricity can be 300% efficient.
I think the writer needs to study physics (and maths would help.)
I think you need to study what heat pumps do. No, I don't fully
understand it,
but I believe what people who apparently do say.
If any of them say something is 300% efficient I wouldn't believe it.
If they just said 3 times better than something else, that is different.
It means that a heat pump can produce three times as much heat
compared to the electrical energy input, as it takes heat from the
environment. Which is true, with many provisos.
On a good day perhaps. However there is the conversion from gas to
electrical power that brings the 300% claim into disrepute.
On 13/11/2023 11:56, Max Demian wrote:
On 13/11/2023 11:44, kat wrote:
On 13/11/2023 10:37, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 13 Nov 2023 at 09:58:15 GMT, ""Les. Hayward"" <les@nospam.invalid>
wrote:
On 13/11/2023 08:31, Vladimir Putin wrote:
It's only 90% efficient. Electricity can be 300% efficient.
I think the writer needs to study physics (and maths would help.)
I think you need to study what heat pumps do. No, I don't fully
understand it,
but I believe what people who apparently do say.
If any of them say something is 300% efficient I wouldn't believe it.
If they just said 3 times better than something else, that is different.
It means that a heat pump can produce three times as much heat compared
to the electrical energy input, as it takes heat from the environment.
Which is true, with many provisos.
On a good day perhaps. However there is the conversion from gas to
electrical power that brings the 300% claim into disrepute.
On 13 Nov 2023 10:37:49 GMT, Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
On 13 Nov 2023 at 09:58:15 GMT, ""Les. Hayward"" <les@nospam.invalid> wrote: >>> On 13/11/2023 08:31, Vladimir Putin wrote:
It's only 90% efficient. Electricity can be 300% efficient.
I think the writer needs to study physics (and maths would help.)
I think you need to study what heat pumps do. No, I don't fully understand it,
but I believe what people who apparently do say.
The seeming logical impossibility is because heat pumps don't generate heat, they move it. The heat itself comes from the source, the fuel consumption of the pump is simply the operating cost.
So it's no different to saying that, for example, an HGV tanker wagon can deliver 1,000 gallons of fuel at the cost of burning 20 gallons in the
engine to get there. The tanker isn't generating fuel, it's just
transporting it. Similarly with a heat pump.
You can, in fact, have a gas-powered heat pump. They're less common now than they used to be, but back in the days before touring caravan sites had mains electricity hook-ups it was common for caravans to have a gas-powered
fridge.
On 13/11/2023 11:44, kat wrote:
On 13/11/2023 10:37, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 13 Nov 2023 at 09:58:15 GMT, ""Les. Hayward"" <les@nospam.invalid> wrote:
On 13/11/2023 08:31, Vladimir Putin wrote:
It's only 90% efficient. Electricity can be 300% efficient.
I think the writer needs to study physics (and maths would help.)
I think you need to study what heat pumps do. No, I don't fully understand it,
but I believe what people who apparently do say.
If any of them say something is 300% efficient I wouldn't believe it.
If they just said 3 times better than something else, that is different.
It means that a heat pump can produce three times as much heat compared to the
electrical energy input, as it takes heat from the environment. Which is true,
with many provisos.
On 13/11/2023 11:56, Max Demian wrote:
On 13/11/2023 11:44, kat wrote:
On 13/11/2023 10:37, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 13 Nov 2023 at 09:58:15 GMT, ""Les. Hayward"" <les@nospam.invalid> wrote:
On 13/11/2023 08:31, Vladimir Putin wrote:
It's only 90% efficient. Electricity can be 300% efficient.
I think the writer needs to study physics (and maths would help.)
I think you need to study what heat pumps do. No, I don't fully understand it,
but I believe what people who apparently do say.
If any of them say something is 300% efficient I wouldn't believe it.
If they just said 3 times better than something else, that is different.
It means that a heat pump can produce three times as much heat compared to the
electrical energy input, as it takes heat from the environment. Which is true,
with many provisos.
Quite. Three times better than other forms that use the same amount of energy.
That is simple English, while 300% is the sort of thing people say when exaggerating.
Bear in mind many people know nothing about Physics, and their maths is poor. And that includes the salesman trying to get me to spend a fortune on a heat pump.
On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 11:59:12 +0000, Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:
On 12/11/2023 01:41, Vladimir Putin wrote:
No it doesn't. If you can't access my boiler, you shut off the gas from >>> the outside.
I suspect some places only have a gas valve inside the property next to
the meter.
If they want to, they can insert a self-tapping valve into the supply pipe and then close it. But I suspect that would be an absolute last resort; if they want to disconnect a customer then gaining access to the premises is by far the preferred option, and the police will assist in that if necessary.
A self-tapping valve is used in emergencies, for example when there's a leak and it's unsafe to enter the premises, and also when the supply itself is undergoing maintenance and the gas needs to be prevented from flowing along the pipe. But I don't think it would be the method of choice when disconnecting someone for contractual reasons, such as an unpaid bill or refusing access to the meter. They're allowed to force entry in those circumstances, and that's usually a better option.
On 13 Nov 2023 at 20:06:43 GMT, "kat" <littlelionne@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 13/11/2023 11:56, Max Demian wrote:
On 13/11/2023 11:44, kat wrote:
On 13/11/2023 10:37, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 13 Nov 2023 at 09:58:15 GMT, ""Les. Hayward"" <les@nospam.invalid> wrote:
On 13/11/2023 08:31, Vladimir Putin wrote:
It's only 90% efficient. Electricity can be 300% efficient.
It means that a heat pump can produce three times as much heat compared to theI think the writer needs to study physics (and maths would help.)
I think you need to study what heat pumps do. No, I don't fully understand it,
but I believe what people who apparently do say.
If any of them say something is 300% efficient I wouldn't believe it.
If they just said 3 times better than something else, that is different. >>>
electrical energy input, as it takes heat from the environment. Which is true,
with many provisos.
Quite. Three times better than other forms that use the same amount of energy.
That is simple English, while 300% is the sort of thing people say when
exaggerating.
Depends if they say 300% *of* the energy put in rather then 300% *more*. But anyway the ratio can be anything from 5 times in favourable conditions to about 1.5 times in Winter with an air source! Or even less if the heat exchanger gets covered in frost.
Bear in mind many people know nothing about Physics, and their maths is poor.
And that includes the salesman trying to get me to spend a fortune on a heat >> pump.
Quite so.
On 13/11/2023 20:28, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 13 Nov 2023 at 20:06:43 GMT, "kat" <little...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 13/11/2023 11:56, Max Demian wrote:
On 13/11/2023 11:44, kat wrote:
On 13/11/2023 10:37, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 13 Nov 2023 at 09:58:15 GMT, ""Les. Hayward"" <l...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
On 13/11/2023 08:31, Vladimir Putin wrote:
It's only 90% efficient. Electricity can be 300% efficient.
It means that a heat pump can produce three times as much heat compared to theI think the writer needs to study physics (and maths would help.) >>>>>I think you need to study what heat pumps do. No, I don't fully understand it,
but I believe what people who apparently do say.
If any of them say something is 300% efficient I wouldn't believe it. >>>>
If they just said 3 times better than something else, that is different. >>>
electrical energy input, as it takes heat from the environment. Which is true,
with many provisos.
Quite. Three times better than other forms that use the same amount of energy.
That is simple English, while 300% is the sort of thing people say when
exaggerating.
Depends if they say 300% *of* the energy put in rather then 300% *more*. But
anyway the ratio can be anything from 5 times in favourable conditions to about 1.5 times in Winter with an air source! Or even less if the heat exchanger gets covered in frost.
Bear in mind many people know nothing about Physics, and their maths is poor.
And that includes the salesman trying to get me to spend a fortune on a heat
pump.
Quite so.Yes, which means if someone asks for more detail, such as the assorted examples
above - would he be able to explain it, in ways the prospective customer understands.
Anyway, the statement above which I can't believe was
"Electricity can be 300% efficient."
Not even "more efficient". Just rather more than 100% which seems to be the normal maximum.
On 13/11/2023 11:48, Mark Goodge wrote:
You can, in fact, have a gas-powered heat pump. They're less common now than >> they used to be, but back in the days before touring caravan sites had mains >> electricity hook-ups it was common for caravans to have a gas-powered
fridge.
That's all right for a fridge, but it isn't a way you can get more than
100% efficiency from gas. Electrically powered heat pumps work because >electricity is a "high grade" energy (low entropy) and heat (and gas) is
low grade energy. You can't get more than 100% heat from gas.
(I don't know how gas fridges work, but they aren't heat pumps.)
On Tuesday, 14 November 2023 at 10:34:58 UTC, kat wrote:
Anyway, the statement above which I can't believe was
"Electricity can be 300% efficient."
Not even "more efficient". Just rather more than 100% which seems to be the >> normal maximum.
That claim simply means that for every kWh of electrical energy used, you get >3 kWh of heat energy.
I've got no idea if it's true.
On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 18:16:02 +0000, Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:
On 13/11/2023 11:48, Mark Goodge wrote:
You can, in fact, have a gas-powered heat pump. They're less common now than
they used to be, but back in the days before touring caravan sites had mains
electricity hook-ups it was common for caravans to have a gas-powered
fridge.
That's all right for a fridge, but it isn't a way you can get more than
100% efficiency from gas. Electrically powered heat pumps work because
electricity is a "high grade" energy (low entropy) and heat (and gas) is
low grade energy. You can't get more than 100% heat from gas.
(I don't know how gas fridges work, but they aren't heat pumps.)
They are heat pumps. All refrigeration devices are heat pumps. That's how refrigeration works. The heat from inside the fridge is pumped out of it, leaving the contents cooler than the ambient temperature. It's just that gas is an inefficient way of running a heat pump, compared to electricity.
Mark
On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 03:26:50 -0800 (PST), "brianwh...@hotmail.com" <brianwh...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Tuesday, 14 November 2023 at 10:34:58 UTC, kat wrote:
Anyway, the statement above which I can't believe was
"Electricity can be 300% efficient."
Not even "more efficient". Just rather more than 100% which seems to be the
normal maximum.
That claim simply means that for every kWh of electrical energy used, you get
3 kWh of heat energy.
I've got no idea if it's true.It is true. And the reason it's true is that in a heat pump, the electricity doesn't generate heat, it transports it. It moves the already existing heat from the air (or ground, in a ground source pump) into the building. All the actual heat comes from the source. The electricity is just a means of powering the pump. It works in exactly the same way as an air-conditioning unit, except in reverse - it's putting heat into the building instead of taking it out.
That's different to burning gas, or using electricity to power, say, a fan heater or a bar heater, where in those cases the gas or electricity is being converted directly to heat. You obviously can't get more than 100%
efficiency in that, and in reality it's lower than 100%.
The thing that people often find non-intuitive about heat pumps is how they can heat a building even when it's cold outside. Because if all they're
doing is moving heat from the outside to the inside, where is it coming from when it's sub-zero outside? But the point here is that the temperature difference which matters isn't the difference from zero degrees Celsius,
it's the difference from zero Kelvin. To a human, the difference between 0C and 30C is massive, and our bodies easily detect it. But to a heat pump, that's just a difference between 273K and 303K, which is relatively minor
and the pump will not be significantly less effective at the lower temperature than it is the higher.
Having said that, it is true that the word "efficiency" is, technically, the wrong one to use for a heat pump. Efficiency is really only meaningful when you're talking about *converting* one form of energy into another. So when you convert the energy in gas into heat energy via a gas burner, you can do so at up to 90% efficiency and when converting electricity into heat energy via an electric heating element you can reach near 100% efficiency. But a heat pump doesn't convert electricity into heat at all, so its conversion efficiency is 0%[1].
That, though, doesn't tell us anything useful about how effective a heat
pump is in getting heat into the building. Now, there is a technical term
for measuring how effective something is in transporting energy from one place to another as opposed to converting it, and that term is "coefficient of performance", or COP. What that measures is how much energy to run something compares to how much energy it transports. The COP (or its related term, Energy Efficiency Rating or EER) is actually used for things which do cooling, such as fridges, freezers and air-conditioners. But it's rarely expressed explicitly anywhere in the customer data, instead it's hidden away behind a generic "Energy Rating" of A to F. So it's not a term that most consumers are familiar with.
When a householder is considering what kind of heating system to use in
their house, though, they need to be able to make a meaningful comparison across different types. You can meaningfully compare a gas boiler with an efficiency of 90% with an electric heater with an efficiency of 98%, because they're both doing the same thing - converting their fuel into heat. But how do you compare a 99% efficient electric immersion heater with a 2.5 COP heat pump? The answer is you can't, unless you know what the COP is, and most people don't.
For the sake of consumer-friendliness, therefore, the COP of a heat pump system is typically expressed as if it were converting fuel to heat, even though in reality it isn't. Because, to the consumer, that's what matters - "If I put 10 kWh[2] of fuel energy into this thing, how many kWh of heat energy will I get out?".
Fortunately, that's actually easy to answer, because if you multiply the COP by 100 and then call it a percent, it produces a figure that is directly comparable with conversion efficiency.
So, going right back to the original statement, a gas boiler converts gas into heat at 90% efficiency, whereas a heat pump can have a COP of up to 3, which is the equivalent of having a heater which runs at 300% efficiency. It's not actually 300% efficient, because it's not actually a heater, it's a different thing altogether. But if you want to know how much heat energy you will get if you put 10 kWh of electricity into it, the answer is 30 kWh of heat - just as if you put 10 kWh of gas into a combi boiler, you will get
9 kWh of heat. And that's what customers care about.
[1] Well, the motor probably does warm up a bit, so not quite zero, but definitely negligible.
[2] Even kWh is a slightly dumbed down measure, because in reality that's only a measurement of electrical energy rather than gas energy or heat energy. But since consumers aren't expected to understand Joules, we use kWh equivalent for things like heat and gas.
Mark
"Vladimir Putin" <russia@will.rule> wrote in message news:op.2dprhre69r1bhh@ryzen...
Why should we prevent suicide?
In some cases because the suicide might be doing so
simply in order to escape their responsibilities which
others are then going to have to face up to. In the
way of orphaned children, mountainous debts etc
Denying someone the right to leave a life they don't enjoy
is not exactly humane.
Except life isn't just for enjoyment is it ?
There are thousands possibly millions of people in the
world who's life by any objective standards can hardly
be described as enjoyable. People working a 60 hr weeks
simply to feed themselves and their families, people in
chronic pain, cripples etc. But all of whom nevertheless
regard life as still worth living
Which isn't to say that any such considerations would
necessarily apply to someone in chronic pain with a
terminal illness. Just so long as it was they themselves
and not potential beneficiaries, their <vomit> loved
ones </vomit>, who took the actual decisions.
On 2023-11-01, Vladimir Putin <russia@will.rule> wrote:
On Mon, 30 Oct 2023 17:21:34 -0000, Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 30/10/2023 12:51, Max Demian wrote:
On 30/10/2023 07:48, Commander Kinsey wrote:There is an old, probably mythical story, about someone who tried to
Why wasn't everyone dying? CO is very poisonous.
It was a popular means for suicide. People turned the gas oven on
(without lighting it) and lay on their back with their head in the oven. >>>>
And John Christie "treated" his "patients" with town gas, the smell
disguised with Friar's Balsam.
kill himself with the traditional means of sticking his head in a gas oven. >>>
After a while he got bored, sat up, and lit a cigarette...
While I was looking for a source for that I came across
<https://www.jstor.org/stable/1147403>
Any particular reason for the pretty <> round the link?
It's a semi-standard way of helping to indicate where a URL begins and
ends when embedded in unstructured text. See RFC 3986 Appendix C: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3986.html#appendix-C
Apparently the suicide rate dropped when town gas was replaced by
natural gas.
Why should we prevent suicide? Denying someone the right to leave a
life they don't enjoy is not exactly humane.
I agree, if they have a long-settled intention to do so. But quite
a lot of people who try to commit suicide are happy to have failed
if they survive
- as demonstrated by the fact that when we make it
slightly harder to kill yourself (e.g. by limiting pack sizes of
paracetamol) the number of suicide deaths reduces.
On Tuesday, 14 November 2023 at 19:28:58 UTC, Mark Goodge wrote:
On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 03:26:50 -0800 (PST), "brianwh...@hotmail.com"
<brianwh...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Tuesday, 14 November 2023 at 10:34:58 UTC, kat wrote:It is true. And the reason it's true is that in a heat pump, the electricity >> doesn't generate heat, it transports it. It moves the already existing heat >> from the air (or ground, in a ground source pump) into the building. All the >> actual heat comes from the source. The electricity is just a means of
Anyway, the statement above which I can't believe was
"Electricity can be 300% efficient."
Not even "more efficient". Just rather more than 100% which seems to be the
normal maximum.
That claim simply means that for every kWh of electrical energy used, you get
3 kWh of heat energy.
I've got no idea if it's true.
powering the pump. It works in exactly the same way as an air-conditioning >> unit, except in reverse - it's putting heat into the building instead of
taking it out.
Yes, sorry I should have been clearer. I understand how heat pumps work, and I >understand thermodynamics (albeit it's 30 years since I last studied it). What >I've got no idea about is whether, in practice, in UK homes, heat pumps achieve
that "300% efficiency".
On Wed, 01 Nov 2023 10:54:01 -0000, Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote:
On 2023-11-01, Vladimir Putin <russia@will.rule> wrote:
On Mon, 30 Oct 2023 17:21:34 -0000, Vir Campestris
<vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 30/10/2023 12:51, Max Demian wrote:
On 30/10/2023 07:48, Commander Kinsey wrote:There is an old, probably mythical story, about someone who tried to
Why wasn't everyone dying? CO is very poisonous.
It was a popular means for suicide. People turned the gas oven on
(without lighting it) and lay on their back with their head in the oven. >>>>>
And John Christie "treated" his "patients" with town gas, the smell
disguised with Friar's Balsam.
kill himself with the traditional means of sticking his head in a gas oven.
After a while he got bored, sat up, and lit a cigarette...
While I was looking for a source for that I came across
<https://www.jstor.org/stable/1147403>
Any particular reason for the pretty <> round the link?
It's a semi-standard way of helping to indicate where a URL begins and
ends when embedded in unstructured text. See RFC 3986 Appendix C:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3986.html#appendix-C
Not needed, it begins with http and ends with a space.
On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 13:37:06 -0800 (PST), Brian W
<brianwh...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Tuesday, 14 November 2023 at 19:28:58 UTC, Mark Goodge wrote:
On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 03:26:50 -0800 (PST), "brianwh...@hotmail.com"
<brianwh...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Tuesday, 14 November 2023 at 10:34:58 UTC, kat wrote:It is true. And the reason it's true is that in a heat pump, the electricity
Anyway, the statement above which I can't believe was
"Electricity can be 300% efficient."
Not even "more efficient". Just rather more than 100% which seems to be the
normal maximum.
That claim simply means that for every kWh of electrical energy used, you get
3 kWh of heat energy.
I've got no idea if it's true.
doesn't generate heat, it transports it. It moves the already existing heat
from the air (or ground, in a ground source pump) into the building. All the
actual heat comes from the source. The electricity is just a means of
powering the pump. It works in exactly the same way as an air-conditioning >> unit, except in reverse - it's putting heat into the building instead of >> taking it out.
Yes, sorry I should have been clearer. I understand how heat pumps work, and IYes, they can (with the obvious proviso that by "300% efficient" we really mean a COP of 3). Lengthy explanation follows, skip to the last paragraph if you're not that interested...
understand thermodynamics (albeit it's 30 years since I last studied it). What
I've got no idea about is whether, in practice, in UK homes, heat pumps achieve
that "300% efficiency".
The actual COP is determined a lot by the type of pump, the type of installation, the weather and the use. Rather than use COP for comparison purposes, there's a separate metric called Seasonal Performance Factor (SPF) which is essentially the real-life (as opposed to ideal conditions) COP averaged over a year of typical domestic (or business) usage. That's further split into Design SPF (ie, that which the pump can realistically be expected to achieve in typical use) and Installed SPF (which can be higher or lower than the Design SPF depending on the actual use - in particular, how high
the customer turns up the thermostat and how well-designed the heating
system that the pump feeds is).
To further complicate (or simplify, depending on your perspective) things, there is yet another metric called the Standard Assessment Procedure (SAP), which has subsets for different types of heating systems (eg, gas boilers, back boilers, oil boilers, heat pumps, electric immersion heaters, etc) that can then be used to compare across different types of heating as well
between as dfferent models of the same type of heating. The SAP is expressed as a percentage, because, as originally developed (for gas/oil/electric heating), it is, literally, a measure of the real-life conversion efficiency of the unit, for which a percentage is the most easily understood metric.
The SAP for heat pumps is, therefore, also expressed as a percentage, even though it's not measuring conversion efficiency, in order to make their real-world performance comparable with other forms of heating.
So for heat pumps, the SAP is broadly the same as the Design SPF (albeit calculated somewhat differently) multiplied by 100 and with a percent mark stuck on the end. Which is fine when you are comparing the effectiveness of
a heat pump with a gas boiler or an immersion heater in order to know how much they will cost to run, but generates precisely the kind of tangential discussion seen here when people wonder how you can have more than 100%!
Anyway, back to the original question, Ofgem sets minimum standards for domestic heat pumps in the UK. They must have a minimum COP of 2.9 (lab-tested and certified), and a Design SPF of at least 2.5. In practice, most of those on the market comfortably exceed those requirements. So yes, the original statement is accurate, and you will routinely find heat pumps advertised as having an efficiency (by which the vendor means the SAP) of 300% or more.
Mark
On 01/11/2023 04:43, Vladimir Putin wrote:
On Mon, 30 Oct 2023 12:51:57 -0000, Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com>Methane will only kill you if the concentration is high enough to
wrote:
Why wasn't everyone dying? CO is very poisonous.
It was a popular means for suicide. People turned the gas oven on
(without lighting it) and lay on their back with their head in the oven.
Doesn't methane kill you then? I thought you could still do so.
displace the oxygen in the air. I'd guess it would take about 50%
methane, 50% air before it would kill you.
Apparently we need some methane (I thought it was neephane as a kid),
hence astronauts have farts circulated to their breathing apparatus.
On 05/12/2023 22:30, Vladimir Putin wrote:
Apparently we need some methane (I thought it was neephane as a kid),
hence astronauts have farts circulated to their breathing apparatus.
Divers commonly use compressed air, or heliox mixes, which contain no methane.
Andy
On Wed, 01 Nov 2023 15:25:47 +0000, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 1 Nov 2023 at 13:50:15 GMT, "Max Demian" <max_demian@bigfoot.com>
wrote:
On 01/11/2023 04:43, Vladimir Putin wrote:
On Mon, 30 Oct 2023 12:51:57 -0000, Max Demian
<max_demian@bigfoot.com>
wrote:
On 30/10/2023 07:48, Commander Kinsey wrote:
Why wasn't everyone dying? CO is very poisonous.
It was a popular means for suicide. People turned the gas oven on
(without lighting it) and lay on their back with their head in the
oven.
Doesn't methane kill you then? I thought you could still do so.
Any gas breathed on its own will kill you apart from oxygen (e.g.
helium or laughing gas). It's the presence of CO2 that stimulates
breathing, not the lack of O2.
Methane is lighter than air so it will tend to rise and pull in air
behind it.
So it's not a very efficient way to aphyxiate people.
Indeed. The Nazis did a lot of work into this.
On 01/11/2023 04:43, Vladimir Putin wrote:
On Mon, 30 Oct 2023 12:51:57 -0000, Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com>
wrote:
On 30/10/2023 07:48, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 15:40:01 +0100, Martin Brown
<'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:
On 25/10/2023 23:27, Commander Kinsey wrote:
UK government considering breaking into people's homes to check their >>>>>> boilers can take hydrogen.
Why not just cut off the supply from the outside?! They're a bunch of >>>>>> criminals!
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/21/hydrogen-boiler-home-heating-uk
"The safety issues involved with sending hydrogen through gas pipes >>>>>> mean
upgrading any home would require shutting down the existing gas supply >>>>>> for a whole district at a time to ensure the safety of all boilers, >>>>>> including forced entry to any households that had not agreed to
comply."
They had to do pretty much the same when they shifted from damp Town's >>>>> gas to the modern drier natural gas. The former was roughly 50:50
carbon
monoxide
Why wasn't everyone dying? CO is very poisonous.
It was a popular means for suicide. People turned the gas oven on
(without lighting it) and lay on their back with their head in the oven.
Doesn't methane kill you then? I thought you could still do so.
Any gas breathed on its own will kill you apart from oxygen (e.g. helium
or laughing gas). It's the presence of CO2 that stimulates breathing,
not the lack of O2.
On Wed, 01 Nov 2023 13:50:15 -0000, Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:
On 01/11/2023 04:43, Vladimir Putin wrote:
On Mon, 30 Oct 2023 12:51:57 -0000, Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com>
wrote:
On 30/10/2023 07:48, Commander Kinsey wrote:
Why wasn't everyone dying? CO is very poisonous.
It was a popular means for suicide. People turned the gas oven on
(without lighting it) and lay on their back with their head in the
oven.
Doesn't methane kill you then? I thought you could still do so.
Any gas breathed on its own will kill you apart from oxygen (e.g. helium
or laughing gas). It's the presence of CO2 that stimulates breathing,
not the lack of O2.
An insane way to design a body.
On 06/12/2023 22:36, Vladimir Putin wrote:
On Wed, 01 Nov 2023 13:50:15 -0000, Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com>
wrote:
On 01/11/2023 04:43, Vladimir Putin wrote:
On Mon, 30 Oct 2023 12:51:57 -0000, Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com> >>>> wrote:
On 30/10/2023 07:48, Commander Kinsey wrote:
Why wasn't everyone dying? CO is very poisonous.
It was a popular means for suicide. People turned the gas oven on
(without lighting it) and lay on their back with their head in the
oven.
Doesn't methane kill you then? I thought you could still do so.
Any gas breathed on its own will kill you apart from oxygen (e.g. helium >>> or laughing gas). It's the presence of CO2 that stimulates breathing,
not the lack of O2.
An insane way to design a body.
Oxygen is 20% of the air. A 1% (20%->19%) reduction would be hard to
detect. CO2 is 0.04% of the air. A 1% increase clearly would be easier
to detect (0.04%->1.04%). (And maybe it's easier to detect changes in
CO2 than O2; I don't know how it works.)
And in nature we don't encounter cylinders of pure gases like He or N2O.
On 13/11/2023 08:33, Vladimir Putin wrote:
On Sun, 12 Nov 2023 13:13:40 -0000, Martin Brown
<'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:
Oil is incredibly expensive by comparison and solid fuel requires a lot
of manual handling. My village also has no gas supply despite being in
the danger zone of one of the UK's highest pressure gas pipelines.
Thanks for giving a good reason to avoid gas. I repeat your words -
"danger zone".
It is a 3500psi pipeline. The last time it breached about 3 decades ago
the sound level at 10m was 180dB. They fly helicopters along it every
week with a sniffer to detect even the faintest leak. It is buried about
6m down and there is a no dig zone for 50m either side.
Any form of energy dense fuel poses some risk. Petrol is so dangerous
and has such a high benzene content 0.5-1% that you should not really be allowed to sell it to the general public on H&S grounds.
https://www.fueloils.co.uk/files/mydocs/Fuel_Oils_Unleaded_Petrol_Spec_Safety_Sheet_2015.pdf
Except that it is needed to keep cars running so we live with the risk.
It seems like lithium battery powered cars also pose something of a risk
as does the increasing use of engineering plastics in the body shell and bumpers. Most plastics burn rather well once they catch light.
Heat pumps are fine provided that there *is* a reliable electricity
supply - that is by no means certain where I live especially in winter.
It's reliable in 99% of the country. If it isn't where you live, get a
UPS and wire some huge batteries to it.
That is only adequate for keeping a PC going for a while.
I have a petrol electric generator for the house but it would be nothing like powerful enough to run an air source heat pump. It can barely cope with
the start up current of a decent sized freezer compressor.
Our core infrastructure is quite literally falling apart in the north.
On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 17:23:57 -0000, Martin Brown
<'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:
On 13/11/2023 08:33, Vladimir Putin wrote:
On Sun, 12 Nov 2023 13:13:40 -0000, Martin Brown
<'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:
Oil is incredibly expensive by comparison and solid fuel requires a lot >>>> of manual handling. My village also has no gas supply despite being in >>>> the danger zone of one of the UK's highest pressure gas pipelines.
Thanks for giving a good reason to avoid gas. I repeat your words -
"danger zone".
It is a 3500psi pipeline. The last time it breached about 3 decades ago
the sound level at 10m was 180dB. They fly helicopters along it every
week with a sniffer to detect even the faintest leak. It is buried about
6m down and there is a no dig zone for 50m either side.
Electricity is a wonderful invention and is much safer.
On 15/01/2024 05:42, Vladimir Putin wrote:
On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 17:23:57 -0000, Martin Brown
<'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:
On 13/11/2023 08:33, Vladimir Putin wrote:
On Sun, 12 Nov 2023 13:13:40 -0000, Martin Brown
<'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:
Oil is incredibly expensive by comparison and solid fuel requires a lot >>>>> of manual handling. My village also has no gas supply despite being in >>>>> the danger zone of one of the UK's highest pressure gas pipelines.
Thanks for giving a good reason to avoid gas. I repeat your words -
"danger zone".
It is a 3500psi pipeline. The last time it breached about 3 decades ago
the sound level at 10m was 180dB. They fly helicopters along it every
week with a sniffer to detect even the faintest leak. It is buried about >>> 6m down and there is a no dig zone for 50m either side.
Electricity is a wonderful invention and is much safer.
Generating it from gas is inherently inefficient due to the Second Law
of Thermodynamics.
On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 11:34:26 +0000, Max Demian
<max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:
On 15/01/2024 05:42, Vladimir Putin wrote:
On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 17:23:57 -0000, Martin Brown
<'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:
On 13/11/2023 08:33, Vladimir Putin wrote:
On Sun, 12 Nov 2023 13:13:40 -0000, Martin Brown
<'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:
Oil is incredibly expensive by comparison and solid fuel requires a lot >>>>>> of manual handling. My village also has no gas supply despite being in >>>>>> the danger zone of one of the UK's highest pressure gas pipelines.
Thanks for giving a good reason to avoid gas. I repeat your words - >>>>> "danger zone".
It is a 3500psi pipeline. The last time it breached about 3 decades ago >>>> the sound level at 10m was 180dB. They fly helicopters along it every
week with a sniffer to detect even the faintest leak. It is buried about >>>> 6m down and there is a no dig zone for 50m either side.
Electricity is a wonderful invention and is much safer.
Generating it from gas is inherently inefficient due to the Second Law
of Thermodynamics.
Surely the answer to each of these problems is government legislation?
A new bill brought before Parliament to declare the high pressure
pipeline to be safe and to repeal the Second Law of Thermodynamics
ought to do it.
Nick
On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 11:59:12 +0000, Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:
On 12/11/2023 01:41, Vladimir Putin wrote:
No it doesn't. If you can't access my boiler, you shut off the gas from >>> the outside.
I suspect some places only have a gas valve inside the property next to
the meter.
If they want to, they can insert a self-tapping valve into the supply pipe and then close it. But I suspect that would be an absolute last resort; if they want to disconnect a customer then gaining access to the premises is by far the preferred option, and the police will assist in that if necessary.
A self-tapping valve is used in emergencies, for example when there's a leak and it's unsafe to enter the premises, and also when the supply itself is undergoing maintenance and the gas needs to be prevented from flowing along the pipe. But I don't think it would be the method of choice when disconnecting someone for contractual reasons, such as an unpaid bill or refusing access to the meter. They're allowed to force entry in those circumstances, and that's usually a better option.
On 12/11/2023 01:41, Vladimir Putin wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 13:47:28 +0100, Mark Goodge
<usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 11:37:41 +0100, Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com>
wrote:
On 26/10/2023 11:00, Colin Bignell wrote:
On 25/10/2023 23:27, Commander Kinsey wrote:
UK government considering breaking into people's homes to check their >>>>>> boilers can take hydrogen.
Why not just cut off the supply from the outside?! They're a bunch of >>>>>> criminals!
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/21/hydrogen-boiler-home-heating-uk
"The safety issues involved with sending hydrogen through gas pipes >>>>>> mean upgrading any home would require shutting down the existing gas >>>>>> supply for a whole district at a time to ensure the safety of all
boilers, including forced entry to any households that had not agreed >>>>>> to comply."
No change. The utility companies already have the power to force entry >>>>> when there is a safety concern. However, when I worked for an
electricity board, it was usual to employ a locksmith, rather than a >>>>> door ram, and the property had to be left secure afterwards.
Yes, but gas meters are usually accessible from outside the property
using a key in the gas company's possession.
Mine isn't, it's in the garage.
But, in any case, it's not the meter which is the issue here. It's the
boiler, which has to be checked to ensure it's compatible with hydrogen.
No it doesn't. If you can't access my boiler, you shut off the gas from
the outside.
I suspect some places only have a gas valve inside the property next to
the meter.
On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 12:53:34 -0000, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 11:59:12 +0000, Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com>
wrote:
On 12/11/2023 01:41, Vladimir Putin wrote:
No it doesn't. If you can't access my boiler, you shut off the gas from >>>> the outside.
I suspect some places only have a gas valve inside the property next to
the meter.
If they want to, they can insert a self-tapping valve into the supply pipe >> and then close it. But I suspect that would be an absolute last resort; if >> they want to disconnect a customer then gaining access to the premises is by >> far the preferred option, and the police will assist in that if necessary. >>
A self-tapping valve is used in emergencies, for example when there's a leak >> and it's unsafe to enter the premises, and also when the supply itself is
undergoing maintenance and the gas needs to be prevented from flowing along >> the pipe. But I don't think it would be the method of choice when
disconnecting someone for contractual reasons, such as an unpaid bill or
refusing access to the meter. They're allowed to force entry in those
circumstances, and that's usually a better option.
Breaking into someone's home, which if you or I did it would be illegal, cannot possibly be called a "better option".
On 13 Nov 2023 10:37:49 GMT, Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
On 13 Nov 2023 at 09:58:15 GMT, ""Les. Hayward"" <les@nospam.invalid> wrote: >>
On 13/11/2023 08:31, Vladimir Putin wrote:
It's only 90% efficient. Electricity can be 300% efficient.
I think the writer needs to study physics (and maths would help.)
I think you need to study what heat pumps do. No, I don't fully understand it,
but I believe what people who apparently do say.
Going back to the original comment, though, saying that heat pumps can be 300% efficient while gas is only 90% efficient is somewhat missing the point that gas is a considerably cheaper fuel than electricity. The average cost
of gas is 6.89p per kWh (unit of energy), while the average cost of electricity is 27.35p per kWh. So a heat pump needs to be nearly four times as efficient as a gas burner in order to be cheaper to run. At 90%
efficiency for gas and 300% for a heat pump, the balance is, still, tilted slightly towards gas as the more economical fuel.
In the long run that will almost certainly change as the technology
improves, and if you already generate your own electricity via solar then
the heat pump will be more economical overall.
But for the average household
without solar panels right now, switching to a heat pump will slightly increase, not decrease, fuel costs.
On 13 Nov 2023 at 11:44:29 GMT, "kat" <littlelionne@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 13/11/2023 10:37, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 13 Nov 2023 at 09:58:15 GMT, ""Les. Hayward"" <les@nospam.invalid> wrote:
On 13/11/2023 08:31, Vladimir Putin wrote:
It's only 90% efficient. Electricity can be 300% efficient.
I think the writer needs to study physics (and maths would help.)
I think you need to study what heat pumps do. No, I don't fully understand it,
but I believe what people who apparently do say.
If any of them say something is 300% efficient I wouldn't believe it.
If they just said 3 times better than something else, that is different.
It hinges on the definition of efficiency. Obviously from thermodynamic laws you can't get energy from nowhere, but the clever thing a heat pump does is get (say) 3kWh of heat into your house by using 1kWh of electrical energy. Clearly the world around your house is having to give up 2kWh of heat in order
for that to happen, but for practical purposes no-one, least of all the weather, cares about that. So you have used one kWh and got 3kWh of benefit. Looking at it from your own selfish POV that is 300% efficient, and no-one of significance (or identifiable) has lost anything.
On 13/11/2023 11:48, Mark Goodge wrote:
On 13 Nov 2023 10:37:49 GMT, Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
On 13 Nov 2023 at 09:58:15 GMT, ""Les. Hayward"" <les@nospam.invalid> wrote:
On 13/11/2023 08:31, Vladimir Putin wrote:
It's only 90% efficient. Electricity can be 300% efficient.
I think the writer needs to study physics (and maths would help.)
I think you need to study what heat pumps do. No, I don't fully understand it,
but I believe what people who apparently do say.
The seeming logical impossibility is because heat pumps don't generate heat, >> they move it. The heat itself comes from the source, the fuel consumption of >> the pump is simply the operating cost.
So it's no different to saying that, for example, an HGV tanker wagon can
deliver 1,000 gallons of fuel at the cost of burning 20 gallons in the
engine to get there. The tanker isn't generating fuel, it's just
transporting it. Similarly with a heat pump.
You can, in fact, have a gas-powered heat pump. They're less common now than >> they used to be, but back in the days before touring caravan sites had mains >> electricity hook-ups it was common for caravans to have a gas-powered
fridge.
That's all right for a fridge, but it isn't a way you can get more than
100% efficiency from gas. Electrically powered heat pumps work because electricity is a "high grade" energy (low entropy) and heat (and gas) is
low grade energy. You can't get more than 100% heat from gas.
(I don't know how gas fridges work, but they aren't heat pumps.)
On 06/12/2023 11:36, Vir Campestris wrote:
On 05/12/2023 22:30, Vladimir Putin wrote:
Apparently we need some methane (I thought it was neephane as a kid),
hence astronauts have farts circulated to their breathing apparatus.
Divers commonly use compressed air, or heliox mixes, which contain no
methane.
The comment about methane and astronauts is simply bizarre. On the
contrary, space suits include a chemical filter to remove harmful gases.
On Wed, 06 Dec 2023 11:52:56 -0000, GB <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid> wrote:
On 06/12/2023 11:36, Vir Campestris wrote:
On 05/12/2023 22:30, Vladimir Putin wrote:
Apparently we need some methane (I thought it was neephane as a kid),
hence astronauts have farts circulated to their breathing apparatus.
Divers commonly use compressed air, or heliox mixes, which contain no
methane.
The comment about methane and astronauts is simply bizarre. On the
contrary, space suits include a chemical filter to remove harmful gases.
I think it has to be for long periods, mind you you're not in a space
suit for long periods, in the space station you can breathe each
other's emissions.
On 2024-01-26, Vladimir Putin <russia@will.rule> wrote:
On Wed, 06 Dec 2023 11:52:56 -0000, GB <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid> wrote: >>> On 06/12/2023 11:36, Vir Campestris wrote:
On 05/12/2023 22:30, Vladimir Putin wrote:
Apparently we need some methane (I thought it was neephane as a kid), >>>>> hence astronauts have farts circulated to their breathing apparatus.
Divers commonly use compressed air, or heliox mixes, which contain no
methane.
The comment about methane and astronauts is simply bizarre. On the
contrary, space suits include a chemical filter to remove harmful gases.
I think it has to be for long periods, mind you you're not in a space
suit for long periods, in the space station you can breathe each
other's emissions.
"Astronauts would die if they didn't breathe farts" sounds like
a classic completely fictional school rumour, on the same level
as one I recall which was "Bruce Lee died because he tensed all
his muscles at once and exploded".
On Wed, 01 Nov 2023 17:41:52 -0000, Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 01/11/2023 04:43, Vladimir Putin wrote:
On Mon, 30 Oct 2023 12:51:57 -0000, Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com>Methane will only kill you if the concentration is high enough to
wrote:
Why wasn't everyone dying? CO is very poisonous.
It was a popular means for suicide. People turned the gas oven on
(without lighting it) and lay on their back with their head in the
oven.
Doesn't methane kill you then? I thought you could still do so.
displace the oxygen in the air. I'd guess it would take about 50%
methane, 50% air before it would kill you.
Apparently we need some methane
On 15/01/2024 05:42, Vladimir Putin wrote:
On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 17:23:57 -0000, Martin Brown
<'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:
On 13/11/2023 08:33, Vladimir Putin wrote:
On Sun, 12 Nov 2023 13:13:40 -0000, Martin Brown
<'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:
Oil is incredibly expensive by comparison and solid fuel requires a lot >>>>> of manual handling. My village also has no gas supply despite being in >>>>> the danger zone of one of the UK's highest pressure gas pipelines.
Thanks for giving a good reason to avoid gas. I repeat your words -
"danger zone".
It is a 3500psi pipeline. The last time it breached about 3 decades ago
the sound level at 10m was 180dB. They fly helicopters along it every
week with a sniffer to detect even the faintest leak. It is buried about >>> 6m down and there is a no dig zone for 50m either side.
Electricity is a wonderful invention and is much safer.
Generating it from gas is inherently inefficient due to the Second Law
of Thermodynamics.
On 26 Jan 2024 at 12:29:13 GMT, "Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote:
On 2024-01-26, Vladimir Putin <russia@will.rule> wrote:
On Wed, 06 Dec 2023 11:52:56 -0000, GB <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid> wrote:
On 06/12/2023 11:36, Vir Campestris wrote:I think it has to be for long periods, mind you you're not in a space
On 05/12/2023 22:30, Vladimir Putin wrote:
Apparently we need some methane (I thought it was neephane as a kid), >>>>>> hence astronauts have farts circulated to their breathing apparatus. >>>>>Divers commonly use compressed air, or heliox mixes, which contain no >>>>> methane.
The comment about methane and astronauts is simply bizarre. On the
contrary, space suits include a chemical filter to remove harmful gases. >>>
suit for long periods, in the space station you can breathe each
other's emissions.
"Astronauts would die if they didn't breathe farts" sounds like
a classic completely fictional school rumour, on the same level
as one I recall which was "Bruce Lee died because he tensed all
his muscles at once and exploded".
I am fairly sure we have no requirement to breathe any methane. I thought the idea was put forward by a poster here as a joke. But perhaps not.
On 23 Jan 2024 at 18:51:00 GMT, ""Vladimir Putin"" <russia@will.rule> wrote:
On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 12:53:34 -0000, Mark Goodge
<usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 11:59:12 +0000, Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com>
wrote:
On 12/11/2023 01:41, Vladimir Putin wrote:
No it doesn't. If you can't access my boiler, you shut off the gas from >>>>> the outside.
I suspect some places only have a gas valve inside the property next to >>>> the meter.
If they want to, they can insert a self-tapping valve into the supply pipe >>> and then close it. But I suspect that would be an absolute last resort; if >>> they want to disconnect a customer then gaining access to the premises is by
far the preferred option, and the police will assist in that if necessary. >>>
A self-tapping valve is used in emergencies, for example when there's a leak
and it's unsafe to enter the premises, and also when the supply itself is >>> undergoing maintenance and the gas needs to be prevented from flowing along >>> the pipe. But I don't think it would be the method of choice when
disconnecting someone for contractual reasons, such as an unpaid bill or >>> refusing access to the meter. They're allowed to force entry in those
circumstances, and that's usually a better option.
Breaking into someone's home, which if you or I did it would be illegal,
cannot possibly be called a "better option".
In this context "significantly less likely to cause an explosion" trumps "avoiding using statutory power to enter an unoccupied property". I assume the
property is empty of people, otherwise the police would be involved.
On 2024-01-26, Vladimir Putin <russia@will.rule> wrote:
On Wed, 06 Dec 2023 11:52:56 -0000, GB <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid> wrote: >>> On 06/12/2023 11:36, Vir Campestris wrote:
On 05/12/2023 22:30, Vladimir Putin wrote:
Apparently we need some methane (I thought it was neephane as a kid), >>>>> hence astronauts have farts circulated to their breathing apparatus.
Divers commonly use compressed air, or heliox mixes, which contain no
methane.
The comment about methane and astronauts is simply bizarre. On the
contrary, space suits include a chemical filter to remove harmful gases.
I think it has to be for long periods, mind you you're not in a space
suit for long periods, in the space station you can breathe each
other's emissions.
"Astronauts would die if they didn't breathe farts" sounds like
a classic completely fictional school rumour, on the same level
as one I recall which was "Bruce Lee died because he tensed all
his muscles at once and exploded".
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 300 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 49:49:21 |
| Calls: | 6,711 |
| Calls today: | 4 |
| Files: | 12,243 |
| Messages: | 5,354,784 |
| Posted today: | 1 |