Question Time last night with Monty Don and the crowd did anyone watch it. It never ceases to frustrate me the nonsense talked about climate change.

The UK is aiming to reduce our 1990 CO2 emission by 12.5% by 2010 by all sorts or techniques and by 26% by 2020, we are apparently ahead of Kyoto targets at the moment. Fantastic, but what is the point, if other large territories are doing the opposite? To put this into context it will take about six months for China to wipe out all UK reductions that are planned for the next ten years, take a look at the graph below which makes the point I think. China will build another two Coal fired power stations and neutralise what we have done. "But we are giving a lead to the world" is often the counter to this argument, well maybe?

http://www.confusedaboutenergy.co.uk/index.php/world-energy-issues/energy-consumption-worldwide

Interestingly the labour MP made the only valid point and that was that Obama will make a big difference to all of this. Interestingly the biggest difference the UK and the USA will make in the short term is that in a recessional world, manufacture and consumption will reduce and this will have a much larger effect on CO2 emissions than any great planned strategies.

And another thing! The UK adds bio fuels grown in Brazil from sugar cane to boost its “local” green credentials, but how can surplanting food crops or forest make and sense in a global context.

http://www.confusedaboutenergy.co.uk/index.php/world-energy-issues/oil-from-crops

from my calculations we should all be burning wood pellets to keep warm, they are fairly cheap and their net carbon dioxide emissions are the lowest. The problem is that if we all switched we would run out of trees and the price would go up!
http://confusedaboutenergy.co.uk/index.php/world-energy-issues

This is one of my all time energy favourites. It was seriously suggested that if you put a windmill on the top of a car, and then drive the car, the turbine will rotate, generate electricity, which would then drive the car.

I would welcome contributions to the site explaining what is wrong with this as a concept.

This also inspired my picture

Here are two true and seemingly contradictory statements:-

1. Electrically powered cars produce less CO2 than gasoline powered cars
2. By driving an electrically powered car you will produce more CO2 than if you drive a gasoline powered car

But which statement is true? Well they both are true. Read More?

It is fairly obvious that hot water pipes and hot water storage cylinders should be insulated to prevent heat loss. Newer cylinders already have insulation pre fitted, but if your tank is un-insulated then according to the Energy Savings Trust by fitting a hot water jacket you will save about £40 per year. Your savings would be even more however if you regularly use an electrical immersion heater, since it costs a lot more to heat water with electricity.
Given that a new thick jacket (75mm) for a hot water tank costs about £12, it should pay for itself in less than six months. Even upgrading and old thinner jacket, is worth considering and will pay back the investment in about 2 years.
This energy/money saving measure is almost a must do. Even if you are renting off a landlord who is too tight fisted to put a jacket on the cylinder, you could buy one and take it with you when you leave!
Insulating hot water pipes will save you less, possibly £10 per year but DIY installation is very easy and materials will only cost about £10. So it will only take a year to payback this investment.

I spent some time talking to someone the other day who considered my attitude to ground source heat pumps maddening. They were concerned mostly with the “green” angle. In most circumstances on cost grounds it can easily be shown that they make little sense unless you are using the most expensive form of heating, for example electricity or bottled gas, see below chart. A plumber friend , field trained by Worcester Bosch, thought them justifiable with fairly expensive LPG, but still the numbers just do not stack up.




For those who do not know if you put one unit (1kWh) of electrical energy into a ground source heat pump, you will be able to get 4 kWh of heat out of the ground. This is absolutely true, BUT the electrical energy used to power the pump costs 4 times the gas energy you might ordinarily heat your house with, so what have you gained? If you consider that they cost £12,000, or $20,000 to install, then you are unlikely to pay back the investment, ever! If you are electrically heated however they are worth it.

There is a “green angle” to this technology. You would be forgiven for thinking that by using a ground source heat pump you will emit 4 times less CO2 with this technology, but this is also untrue. The bigger picture has to be considered. This would only be true if your electrical power were 100% generated by non carbon emitting power stations, and this is certainly not the case. In fact by using a ground source heat pump you will emit about 2.2 times less CO2, which is environmentally good, but can you afford the investment and the slow payback.

I think the Grants from government need to be much better to help us financially justify installing this technology.

Almost all energy savings related internet sites focus on carbon emission and how much carbon dioxide (CO2) you are generating and how much CO2 emission you will prevent by changing what you do.

Our new purchase choices are also often driven by the energy claims of manufacturer’s and by the EU or US energy labelling systems that you see by law on various products.

We believe this focus is wrong, you can end up buying very expensive equipment based on the premise that the product is less damaging to the environment than a competitors’ product. Or you can invest in an expensive technology to reduce CO2 emission where e the investment might have been more wisely deployed elsewhere in your household.

For example the most efficient washer on the market might save £20 a year on your electricity bill but may have cost you and extra £200 to buy, would that £200 have been better deployed insulating your loft?

As another example investing in a wind power if you live in the Shetlands is probably wiser than buying solar panels, but where is the comparative evidence for this?

We are committed to providing information on how to cost effectively reduce energy costs and how best to deploy you financial resources if you wish to invest in new equipment in your household, either as a replacement or as new technology to reduce your environmental impact. Please feel free to look at www.confusedaboutenergy.co.uk and comment and contibute, we are open minded and want to get to the truth.