@editor contuning your theme of MCS. I started reading the audit committee investigation on the insulation scandal and Ian Rippon was explaining how good they were (possibly not quite as bad!)
But I had to stop reading at his sheer arrogance/ignorance/wilful self delusion/simply lying b*st*rd, was so annoying. I will read a little more but a letter to the chairman might be an idea.
The question I was asked over the phone was are you happy with it, about a month after installation in a mild October.
This is why I was pleased a year after installation DESNZ offered me a much more in-depth questionnaire about fulfilling bill cost estimate, warmup times, being warm enough last January, warmth expectations, did we run the pump continuously. All of which are the correct questions to ask, not just are you happy which will only capture the most upset people.
extract from page 22
2kW + Growatt & 4kW +Sunnyboy PV on south-facing roof Solar thermal. 9.5kWh Givenergy battery with AC3. MVHR. Vaillant 7kW ASHP (very pleased with it) open system operating on WC
But I had to stop reading at his sheer arrogance/ignorance/wilful self delusion/simply lying b*st*rd, was so annoying. I will read a little more but a letter to the chairman might be an idea.
I’ve felt the same frustration reading his statements. For what it’s worth, I’ve sent a personal invitation to Sir Ian Rippin to come on the podcast and walk us through his excellency himself. Date, time... his choice. I’m more than happy to clear the diary if he’s prepared to answer questions on the record.
I was asked if I was happy before I was even issued the certificate in a handover pack.
Far too early to make a fair judgement IMHO, it could be distorted negatively by teething troubles or either way because you havent experienced it in operation. If this is what MCS are doing then the 94% number is, as @mars says, meaningless.
4kW peak of solar PV since 2011; EV and a 1930s house which has been partially renovated to improve its efficiency. 7kW Vaillant heat pump.
Look at this comparison between 2 identical Valent heat pumps operating under identical weather conditions (see video for details)
Great comparison. Here is my analysis (I haven't listened to what Glyn says):
Given that this is at low OAT and looking at the FT behaviour, the second one is clearly well oversized and the system volume is hopelessly inadequate. I am guessing that this is a 7kW heat pump in a 3kW house (with correspondingly few radiators so little system volume). In addition either the cylinder in the second one has insufficient surface area, or the target DHW water temperature is set way too high (just look at the flow temp) - unless that is the second runs two legionella cycles within four hours of each other. If this is the case then commissioning alone probably wont fix it entirely, the addition of a sizeable volumizer would probably help a lot, although really it should be downsized to the 5kW model. Its possible that there is a buffer tank in which case that should be removed. The DHW set temperature should be reduced to 48 ish, DHW set to eco mode and the legionella timings checked.
Another possible interpretation (less likely IMHO) is that the system is being operated with TRVs/zone valves most of which have shut down. In this case it could just be a case of weather compensation curve too high and owner needs education in how to run a heat pump. The cycling looks quite regular though, whereas if TRVs were opening and closing the cycles would presumably be less similar. Anyway its easy to tell!. That still wouldn't explain the DHW, for which the likely answer is the same as above.
The first one is right-sized and has a sensible DHW temp setting. Its performing as expected for a competent install.
Im just an amateur though so what would I know?
This post was modified 3 weeks ago 3 times by JamesPa
4kW peak of solar PV since 2011; EV and a 1930s house which has been partially renovated to improve its efficiency. 7kW Vaillant heat pump.
the section of the media that supports the green agenda will bear as much responsibility, should the green agenda be watered down over the next months and particularly at the next election, as the section of the media that is opposed to the green agenda".
The green-supporting media is IMHO failing, by joining the chorus of unrestrained and un-contexed criticism, and in its failure is defeating its own objectives
They are policy choices. Policy choices that should come from clear well-thought out agendas. Which no government in this country has offered for a long time.
Are you saying be nice to the government or the bogeyman will get you?
I'm not sure whether to laugh or just try and rescue my raised eyebrows off the ceiling at that phenomenal statement.
I apologise for the circumlocution in some of my writing, I'm trying to avoid overtly taking a political stance, although I doubt it will be difficult to work out what stance I would take. I'm not going to prolong this by responding in full to your very long post, but I want to pick up on the two things above.
We live in a democracy (just) and, like it or not, we get the Government we elect. Of course we are forced to choose from the alternatives on offer, just like if you are recruiting you can only select from those who apply, that's how life works. If we want to have better choices we will have to make politics more attractive to the best people available who would also do it for altruistic reasons. This might start with cutting government a bit of slack/realism from time to time; I personally wouldn't wish the task of on any well meaning person. For the ill-meaning I can see that it offers attractions, for someone whose principal objective is to do a good job for the people, not just exploit the system, not so. Its frankly amazing that we ever get well meaning prime-ministers (for the avoidance of doubt there are two prime ministers in the past 15 years that I would describe as well-meaning, from different parties). When we do we should celebrate them not continually lambast them if we want to encourage more well meaning people to take the job..
It serves absolutely no positive purpose to rubbish everyone and everything without drawing any comparatives, all it does (in our febrile environment) is encourage ever more radical and self defeating responses from the public cheered on by hatred pedalled by a section of the media. If you wish to interpret that comment as 'the bogeyman will get you', then yes that is true! The bogeyman already got us once in 2016, and we will all be paying for that for the next several decades.
I would not for one minute suggest that any journalist should be nice to politicians (although plenty are), but being nice is not the same as presenting a rounded view, seeking to educate not just sensationalise, and acknowledging the inherent challenges. Thats all I am suggesting might be in our shared interest!
I hope that makes my concerns clearer.
4kW peak of solar PV since 2011; EV and a 1930s house which has been partially renovated to improve its efficiency. 7kW Vaillant heat pump.
the section of the media that supports the green agenda will bear as much responsibility, should the green agenda be watered down over the next months and particularly at the next election, as the section of the media that is opposed to the green agenda".
The green-supporting media is IMHO failing, by joining the chorus of unrestrained and un-contexed criticism, and in its failure is defeating its own objectives
They are policy choices. Policy choices that should come from clear well-thought out agendas. Which no government in this country has offered for a long time.
Are you saying be nice to the government or the bogeyman will get you?
I'm not sure whether to laugh or just try and rescue my raised eyebrows off the ceiling at that phenomenal statement.
I apologise for the circumlocution in some of my writing, I'm trying to avoid overtly taking a political stance, although I doubt it will be difficult to work out what stance I would take. I'm not going to prolong this by responding in full to your very long post, but I want to pick up on the two things above.
We live in a democracy (just) and, like it or not, we get the Government we elect. Of course we are forced to choose from the alternatives on offer, just like if you are recruiting you can only select from those who apply, that's how life works. If we want to have better choices we will have to make politics more attractive to the best people available who would also do it for altruistic reasons. This might start with cutting government a bit of slack/realism from time to time; I personally wouldn't wish the task of on any well meaning person. For the ill-meaning I can see that it offers attractions, for someone whose principal objective is to do a good job for the people, not just exploit the system, not so. Its frankly amazing that we ever get well meaning prime-ministers (for the avoidance of doubt there are two prime ministers in the past 15 years that I would describe as well-meaning, from different parties). When we do we should celebrate them not continually lambast them if we want to encourage more well meaning people to take the job..
It serves absolutely no positive purpose to rubbish everyone and everything without drawing any comparatives, all it does (in our febrile environment) is encourage ever more radical and self defeating responses from the public cheered on by hatred pedalled by a section of the media. If you wish to interpret that comment as 'the bogeyman will get you', then yes that is true! The bogeyman already got us once in 2016, and we will all be paying for that for the next several decades.
I would not for one minute suggest that any journalist should be nice to politicians (although plenty are), but being nice is not the same as presenting a rounded view, seeking to educate not just sensationalise, and acknowledging the inherent challenges. Thats all I am suggesting might be in our shared interest!
I hope that makes my concerns clearer.
I'm going to be a bit more blunt.
Net Zero is an emotive subject; people of all kinds of hidden agendas wading in. That polarises opinions. Modern politics doesn't like agreement. It fosters a "them or us" mentality; polarisation is an aim.
Despite this, we, the electorate, expect our Government to pull strands together and find a path forward that satisfies most people most of the time. We expect it to find consensus and promote collaboration. The contraditions are pretty clear.
Now, let's introduce the media as well. Any assumption that our free press is primarily serving the public good is naive. What the media are doing is commercialising visibility of current affairs. To quote @lucia, that's "that thing that journalists do... 😉". And in order to commercialise it successfully, those current affairs are sensationalised. News isn't really news any more; it's gossip, and that polarises opinions.
The Government needs to sort its house out. It should be serving the people rather than being used as a vehicle to get the current party into power again in four years' time.
The electoral system in this country needs to sort its house out. We should be picking the best democratic representatives, not the least bad ones.
If we have to have a political party system, the political parties need to sort their houses out. They should be finding areas they can collaborate so that long term goals - anything that would require more than one Governmental term to bring about - can be planned with some confidence.
The media need to sort their house out. Short term selling of newspapers, air time and website hits doesn't help the public and any "holding the politicians to account" is only achieved as a byproduct. If they really wanted to help the general public be better informed, the reporting should lay bare opportunities for constructive collaboration that have been discarded just to ensure the "other lot" fail. That reporting should also praise instances of political point-scoring being put aside for the greater good.
@lucia also said "huge swathes of this country have been politically disenfranchised". Absolutely agree. Is the way of making that right to polarise even further? Absolutely not.
105 m2 bungalow in South East England
Mitsubishi Ecodan 8.5 kW air source heat pump
18 x 360W solar panels
1 x 6 kW GroWatt battery and SPH5000 inverter
1 x Myenergi Zappi
1 x VW ID3
Raised beds for home-grown veg and chickens for eggs
"Semper in excretia; sumus solum profundum variat"
The media need to sort their house out. Short term selling of newspapers, air time and website hits doesn't help the public and any "holding the politicians to account" is only achieved as a byproduct. If they really wanted to help the general public be better informed, the reporting should lay bare opportunities for constructive collaboration that have been discarded just to ensure the "other lot" fail. That reporting should also praise instances of political point-scoring being put aside for the greater good.
Can I controversially suggest that, until the media sorts its house out, much of what you rightly request above is politically impossible.
I believe the media bears a very substantial part of the blame for the polarised position we are in, and its getting worse not better. With very few exceptions it is nothing more than a channel by which wealthy owners can malignly influence the public to their own ends, in addition to taking a profit.
Sadly I cant currently see a way out, which is why I would rather vote for a politician (or indeed political party) that appears to have the interests of the people at least partially at heart, even though they cant fully deliver whatever ludicrous promises they have to make to stand any chance of getting elected. Much rather this than one whose motivation is clearly self-interest and nothing more.
This post was modified 3 weeks ago 6 times by JamesPa
4kW peak of solar PV since 2011; EV and a 1930s house which has been partially renovated to improve its efficiency. 7kW Vaillant heat pump.
I believe the media bears a very substantial part of the blame for the polarised position we are in, and its getting worse not better. With very few exceptions it is nothing more than a channel by which wealthy owners can malignly influence the public to their own ends, in addition to taking a profit.
Sadly I cant currently see a way out, which is why I would rather vote for a politician (or indeed political party) that appears to have the interests of the people at least partially at heart, even though they cant fully deliver whatever ludicrous promises they have to make to stand any chance of getting elected. Much rather this than one whose motivation is clearly self-interest and nothing more.
I agree, imperfect systems like voting for politicians to govern or traditional/mass media (and some is not owned by wealthy owners) still help us influence or in some cases feel that we are able to. Social media is usually too keen to sell our data, so we can be manipulated but people insist on using it.
Claiming "politicians are all the same" is not factual and can lower expectations. As the saying goes, "when you are tarnished with bad reputation, you may as well enjoy the benefits".
We would not use a hacksaw to try to sort an uneven wall, most of us are not after revolution but evolution.
I will stick to debate and praise good intentions and approaches.
But since it is human nature to get bored even with perfect solutions, seeking novelty, be driven by anger, etc, social media will always be very attractive... Its main function is now to divide us (in my humble view) and that is exactly what the politicians most focused on it are doing.
16kWh Seplos Fogstar battery; 8kW Solis S6-EH1P8K-L-PLUS hybrid inverter; Ohme Home Pro EV charger; 100Amp head, HA lab on mini PC
I am not sure what this means in practical terms on interconnectors and bills etc. Perhaps @lucia has some more information on the EU market in and what the UK can't currently participate in.
I have seen a few news articles but they lack clarity other than mentioning more expensive and more difficult for the UK since Brexit.
