1. Things you need to know about the new ‘Conversations’ PM system:

    a) DO NOT REPLY TO THE NOTIFICATION EMAIL! I get them, not the intended recipient. I get a lot of them and I do not want them! It is just a notification, log into the site and reply from there.

    b) To delete old conversations use the ‘Leave conversation’ option. This is just delete by another name.
    Dismiss Notice

New gas boilers banned 2025

Discussion in 'off topic' started by hifinutt, May 18, 2021.

  1. Richard Lines

    Richard Lines pfm Member

    There's a reason the big oil giants are pushing hydrogen - the environment isn't one of them...................


  2. Vinny

    Vinny pfm Member

    Educate us all.
    Not the lunatic old chestnut that CURRENTLY the very great bulk of hydrogen comes from petro-chems? LLLLLLOL

    I hope not, I like to learn
    Bob McC likes this.
  3. gavreid

    gavreid pfm Member

    You can see the fraction of electricity generation by source easily enough. Here's one such graph. Today isn't very windy or sunny and more than half our power is being generated from fossil fuels.
  4. Seeker_UK

    Seeker_UK Booyakashah, check out my avatar...

  5. Vinny

    Vinny pfm Member

    There are two, and only two, obstacles to changing to hydrogen as the major fuel - electricity generation and safe small-volume storage for vehicles - you do not want a gas cylinder that fills your car boot.
  6. Vinny

    Vinny pfm Member

    Probably not, but it is irrelevant That is the past. I am not talking the past. Who gives the very smallest flying **** how hydrogen is generated today?

    If, 30 years ago, I had said that 25% of the UK electricity would be from renewables, at economic prices, (I didn't), I would have been told that I was a moron. Where are we now?
    Bob McC likes this.
  7. Sue Pertwee-Tyr

    Sue Pertwee-Tyr Well, I can dream, can’t I?

    I haven’t seen the actual government announcement, so can’t comment definitively, but the devil will be in the detail. Specifically, in the way it is worded. I wouldn’t be surprised to learn, for example, that it is only the banning of boilers which can only run on fossil fuels. That would be consistent with the ban on IC only cars in 2030. Hybrids can still be sold, with IC engines. I rather suspect the intention is to ensure that new boilers can be run on hydrogen, or a mix of H2 and natural gas, so as to avoid at least some of the retrofitting required as and when the piped domestic supply contains a percentage of Hydrogen.
    Vinny likes this.
  8. Seeker_UK

    Seeker_UK Booyakashah, check out my avatar...

    Whether it gets oft repeated or not, Richard's point still stands. Energy companies are moving away from oil because although we seem to be forever reaching 'peak oil', they can see the way the wind is blowing and hydrogen from renewables is where future profit will be.
  9. Chops54

    Chops54 pfm Member

    I find this all rather strange. United Utilities ( I’m assuming it’s them) have just about finished installing two large electricity generators next to our local substation for when demand exceeds capacity. They run off natural gas.
  10. Richard Lines

    Richard Lines pfm Member

    We all need to be aware that vested interests always keen to promote sensationalist headlines to distract.........

    There are reports that detail little need for enormous amounts of expansion. The big issue is storing what we can or could produce. If we operate such as renewables 24/7 and store what we don't use then it becomes available at other times rather than switch it off. As the base of electric powered vehicles increases this expands the storage available.

    I have a Renault Zoe which I charge as much as I can via Solar PV but also via Octopus Go between 0030 - 0430.

    Whether we like it or not we do need nuclear power and I don't think the UK is in a very good position at this time or the foreseeable future. Our existing rectors are creaking to say the least and we simply aren't building anything like adequate replacements. As has been pointed out before Hinckley is a disaster in the making. The other two plants of similar design are hopelessly behind schedule and vastly over budget. The Finnish one should have gone in to service in 2009 and may make it next year.................

    The tidal barrage at Swansea was knocked back because it didn't compare favourably with nuclear in terms of cost. I think the barrages will be much easier to build and with a lot less cost overheads such as decommissioning etc.

    The UK government needs to gets its finger out but given it still thinks HS2 is what we need there really is little hope.


    Sue Pertwee-Tyr likes this.
  11. martin clark

    martin clark pinko bodger

    I can confirm there is a great lack of detail to be had yet on industry guidance side... but essentially it will be new-built-homes only at first.
    (As a practice we are taking it as a given and aiming for zero-carbon design as far is possible already)
    Sue Pertwee-Tyr likes this.
  12. Vinny

    Vinny pfm Member

    GOOD LORD!!!!! Surely not? Heavens to Betsy...............................

    How wrong you are. the technology is there, ready and waiting. Building could start within weeks of district-sized reactors. The problem is ill-informed public opinion.
    Small reactors have been built in the UK for decades (nuclear sub's............)
    Rana and Richard Lines like this.
  13. Richard Lines

    Richard Lines pfm Member

    As quoted above the oil industry likes hydrogen when it is produced from natural gas but it isn't an efficient process.

    The last few weeks have shown that you cannot rely on wind and sun alone. Nuclear still has a significant part to play.

    We need to get on with tidal barrages and tidal turbines - reliable sources of power 24/7 for as long as the Moon is about and given it is only moving away from us at about 4cm a year............

    Interesting video on Patreon from the CEO of Northvolt about batteries. We need to get on with building grid scale battery storage as well.

    We all also need to change some of our habits and expectations. It was a bit depressing to see people being interviewed in Portugal on the BBC this morning. Apparently they need the overseas' holiday - define the word 'need' in this context please. Bang goes another chunk of the environment!!!


    2_dive likes this.
  14. Richard Lines

    Richard Lines pfm Member

    Vinny - OK so if we're at that level of detail. You're quite right and Rolls Royce (is it?) have been pushing this idea. I guess the big problem with distributed small reactors will be NIMBY'ism.

    I'm no industry expert but small reactors c/w battery storage would seem to be eminently doable.


    PTWild and Vinny like this.
  15. Vinny

    Vinny pfm Member

    Give it a rest, please?

    No we don't - FAR cheaper, quicker and next to no environmental impact by comparison to go nuclear.

    No we don't - the world does not have the raw materials, except (possibly) at VAST environmental cost.

    Pass - not qualified to judge but from a biased position - I have never been on holiday or even felt the need.
    Rana likes this.
  16. Seeker_UK

    Seeker_UK Booyakashah, check out my avatar...

    The technology is there and seem an attractive solution but in practice would be problematic. If it was simple, the technology has been there for 50 years and yet it's never been used for local power generation, even when nuclear was seen as the answer to everything. Have you considered why?

    Nuclear powerplants need huge amounts of regulation to operate and deploy. Processing of nuclear waste would become more difficult compared to the current model where waste is generated in a few, isolated sites. The average life for a reactor is >20 years and each one will need to be decomissioned with the site off limits for 100s of years after. Oh, and given the current crop of N-plants face opposition and they're in geologically stable areas usually in the ar*e-end of nowhere, how much opposition would one in each district face? Huge cost / risk implications for security, maintenance, logistics and where are all the nuclear engineers going to come from?

    Obviously RR would be happy to provide but until small fusion reactors come along, the idea is costly, risky and unpalatable compared to distributed renewable generation.
  17. Sue Pertwee-Tyr

    Sue Pertwee-Tyr Well, I can dream, can’t I?

    I still hope for a resurgence of nuclear, in district sized form. And, preferably, based on Thorium as that gets us away from the wretched Uranium/Plutonium cycle. I’d like to see large scale users adopt nuclear as a local source. But under government control, not as privateers. So, for example, Network Rail; major airports, ports and industry, could have locally sited nuclear generation.
    PTWild, wow&flutter and Vinny like this.
  18. Vinny

    Vinny pfm Member

    As mentioned above - nimbyism, plus legislation. There have been no problems in 70? years of operation at sea. The land-based one in NE Scotland similrly (recently decommisioned).

    leave instructions for you great, great, great, great, great grandchildren to make the most of them. The world, however, needs something NOW.

    Dipping out of this one now.

    Enjoy the very good discussion with no slanging - a pleasure so far, folks.
    Sue Pertwee-Tyr likes this.
  19. Seeker_UK

    Seeker_UK Booyakashah, check out my avatar...

  20. MikeMA

    MikeMA pfm Member

    I envisage a massive resurgence in hand knitted woolly jumpers. I already have mine. Just the thing for keeping you warm and snagging your stylus.:eek:

Share This Page


  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice