Siting of panels for solar water heating

In message , Mary Fisher writes

"John Beardmore" wrote in message
That's not what I meant - I meant that on a reasonable day when you need it, i.e. warmer than usual winter's day, it's marginally above useless
None of which changes the fact that whatever energy it does produce in winter will get used. The same tends to be true in spring and autumn. Granted you may have a surplus in summer.
But if you organise your life it won't be _wasted_. Because of various spells of being in hospital this year we haven't been as active as normal but we still managed to do more tasks for which hot water is preferable to cold - and which are more pleasant and/or easier in summer than in winter.
I'm not the world's most organised person but I'm not going to waste something which is free at point of use :-)

We occasionally have a friend over to wash his tuba when we have a surplus.
I'd never realised that brass instruments took so much care and feeding !
Cheers, J/. -- John Beardmore

"John Beardmore" wrote in message

I'm not the world's most organised person but I'm not going to waste something which is free at point of use :-)
We occasionally have a friend over to wash his tuba when we have a surplus.

LOL!

I'd never realised that brass instruments took so much care and feeding !

Nor did I, we never had a brass player in the family and strings and woodwinds don't like being dunked!
Mary

On Tue, 21 Nov 2006 16:30:43 -0000 someone who may be "Mary Fisher" wrote this:-

But if you organise your life it won't be _wasted_.

Indeed. I think it's a little like sorting out the recycling, cooking on the top of the cooker rather then the oven, growing vegetables, using a shower rather than a bath and many other things. It takes a little effort to get organised, but after that it's easy.
The key is encouraging people to organise these bits of their lives. if they do get organised then things like fortnightly bin collections are no problem.
-- David Hansen, Edinburgh I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

On Tue, 21 Nov 2006 16:28:44 +0000 someone who may be John Beardmore wrote this:-

As long as she feels she is doing something, it's OK (whatever the reality of the situation is)
Well - the reality is that she IS doing something. Your blessing and approval are not required.

AOL. It is mildly amusing that the knockers have little to offer as an alternative.
-- David Hansen, Edinburgh I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

In message , David Hansen writes

On Tue, 21 Nov 2006 16:28:44 +0000 someone who may be John Beardmore wookie@wookie.demon.co.uk> wrote this:-
As long as she feels she is doing something, it's OK (whatever the reality of the situation is)
Well - the reality is that she IS doing something. Your blessing and approval are not required.
AOL. It is mildly amusing that the knockers have little to offer as an alternative.

:) Well - there's always nuclear, but let's not go there !
Cheers, J/. -- John Beardmore

In message , John Beardmore writes

In message , raden <raden@kateda.org writes In message , John Beardmore wookie@wookie.demon.co.uk> writes In message , Joe Fischer joe@westpointracing.com> writes "cynic" wrote:
Vacuum tube arrays could possibly be produced fairly cheap, just as 4 foot fluorescent tubes only cost 99 cents the last time I bought them, but I don't have much hope of seeing them sold to the DIY gang in small quantities at a good price.
It's getting better, mostly thanks to the Chinese !
I think I'd argue the exact opposite
... but if you think so, and it keeps you happy ...
My happiness is neither here or there. If you have a point, feel free to make it.

Two points really :
Up until a company tried selling a system to my parents, I was fairly neutral / sympathetic I now consider that the time for any half decent system to actually repay the investment is unrealistically long
The other is that the anything we do in the UK is insignificant in comparison to the big three
-- geoff

In message , raden writes

In message , John Beardmore wookie@wookie.demon.co.uk> writes In message , raden <raden@kateda.org writes In message , John Beardmore wookie@wookie.demon.co.uk> writes In message , Joe Fischer joe@westpointracing.com> writes "cynic" wrote:
Vacuum tube arrays could possibly be produced fairly cheap, just as 4 foot fluorescent tubes only cost 99 cents the last time I bought them, but I don't have much hope of seeing them sold to the DIY gang in small quantities at a good price.
It's getting better, mostly thanks to the Chinese !
I think I'd argue the exact opposite
... but if you think so, and it keeps you happy ...
My happiness is neither here or there. If you have a point, feel free to make it.
Two points really :
Up until a company tried selling a system to my parents, I was fairly neutral / sympathetic I now consider that the time for any half decent system to actually repay the investment is unrealistically long

Well - as I see it, it's up the individual to make up their own mind. Consumers don't install these things to make me happy, but it does please me that these things have an environmental benefit, and in the long run, that they cost less than burning fossil fuels. That's enough for many people, and strikes them as environmentally and financially better than the conventional solution.

The other is that the anything we do in the UK is insignificant in comparison to the big three

If I cut my fossil fuel consumption, it is just as beneficial as somebody in China, India, or the US doing it.
This tendency to abdicate personal responsibility because "anything we do in the UK is insignificant", not only makes it other peoples problem [who may be less well resourced / educated than us] - it makes it other peoples governments problem [which may be less well resourced / educated than us]. How blunt an instrument of change could you possibly devise ?
What's worse, the Americans can justify inaction because the Chinese and Indian populations dwarf their own, and the Indian and Chinese can justify their inaction because individuals in the US have much higher per capita emissions.
There really does come a point where if you want to improve the situation, the best approach is just to do it, rather than lamenting the fact that somebody else is in a 'deadly embrace' of excuses.
Cheers, J/. -- John Beardmore

Joe Fischer wrote:

On 21 Nov 2006 00:33:06 -0800, meow2222@care2.com wrote: Joe Fischer wrote:
Outside city limits in the US, people are often free to build anything, but the power companies may not turn power on in new construction without an inspection.
wish we still had something like that. New builds here are tighly controlled everywhere. Nearly all our land is a no-go zone for new build.
Do you mean no building permits?

No I mean residential building isnt allowed on over 90% of all land.

There are areas here where there are no sanitary sewers and the water table is inches from the surface and no percolation for septic tanks, so residential building is no permitted.
New building is essential in the US, with a million legal immigrants a year, and a million or so illegal, new housing fills up fast.

same here, and national building stock is nowhere near the quantity wanted... but the planners stilll say no.
NT

John Beardmore wrote:

meow2222@care2.com writes
Solar thermal panels for space heating is one of the ways we can save lots of fossil fuels in the future.
I really doubt it !
Whys that?
Because I strongly suspect that there will be cheaper ways to achieve the same thing,
I'm all ears as to what those are. I've not yet found anything cheaper or with better payback than solar flat plate speace heating.
Well, the first problem would be getting planning consent to build one in the UK, but hands on experience of solar in dull winder weather just suggests that the watts aren't there !
I know of one or two people that get a good solar contribution, but they've used heat stores and huge collectors, had big capital investment, and still have to burn some other fuel.

Right, so with big collectors there is return. The ones I'm talking about cost hundreds of quid.

I suspect that a COP5 or better ground source heat pump in a super insulated building with good PASSIVE solar characteristics would be a better deal, simpler and with less kit !

Orders of magnitude more cost.
Well, you've offered nothing with even comparable payback, let alone better.

(with one possible exception that I dont like)
Do tell ?

ok, but I dont propose using it. Wood battens screwed to the outside wall, polythene stretched over and stapled on. Thats it. In winter the outside of the wall is warmer due to greenhouse effect plus insulation effect, so reduced heat loss thru wall, and in some cases a small heat gain. IIRC payback is good, but the issues are horrible. Looks like crap, very vulnerable, needs peeling off every summer, and complete replacement every 4 years.

because the UK doesn't have that many cold but bright days,
No need, we have enough insolation to make it work and pay its way.
I'm not convinced that we do in winter. I'd like to see your calculations on this if you've got any ?

I did calcs in full about 3 yrs ago, lemme go see if I've got them available...
no :( I didnt think it'd be on here. IIRC ROI was somewhere vaguely in the 30s % region.

Space heating performs significantly differently to the more well known dhw because the output temp is much lower, and much more efficient mesh absorber panels can be used.
And these are more efficient in exactly what sense ?

I very much get the feeling youre not familiar with this tech.. Mesh absorbers have 2 or 3 layers of black mesh, and the air passes thru the mesh. The mesh is angled so that all the air against the front panel is air yet to go thru the mesh, which further reduces losses. The 2 or 3 layers of mesh means that losses from any but the frontmost mesh are partly recaptured. Air flow through the mesh maximises turbulence, maximising energy transfer from mesh to air. Couple this with the low temp output of air heating and you've got a panel that can run at 90% efficient. Flat HW panels dont get anything like that, their efficiency is way down when putting hot water out.

because the sun doesn't shine when we need space heating,
the sun shines every day, and there is a simple way to use it to provide evening heat.
Yes

skylight contains IR too.

- but many of the work best in orbit.
because passive solar design is more cost effective.
Unfortunately that one is too vague to know what you mean
Well go away and look it up then !

In that case I'm going to take a wild guess you may mean passive solar buildings. You must be aware that many techniques can be described as passive solar, your comment was pretty vague.
The above isnt much use for tens of millions of existing buildings, and ditto for many new builds. I think a cheaply fitted diy system with good ROI is of more utility myself.

universities, and there is a Nu Aire system on sale in the UK that we
maybe, but none of that is applicable to the solar space heating I'm referring to.
No - but they are all worth looking at.

Too expensive and complex to see widespread use or good ROI.

It also raises planning issues, which knowing the UK, may take decades to resolve.
Perhaps in some circumstances, but not across the board.
:) Build one then !!

Its on the to do list, but too many other things are as well. The small solar setup at the last place worked well, but I just dont have the time here. Maybe one day.
NT

In message , meow2222@care2.com writes

John Beardmore wrote: meow2222@care2.com writes
Solar thermal panels for space heating is one of the ways we can save lots of fossil fuels in the future.
I really doubt it !
Whys that?
Because I strongly suspect that there will be cheaper ways to achieve the same thing,
I'm all ears as to what those are. I've not yet found anything cheaper or with better payback than solar flat plate speace heating.
Well, the first problem would be getting planning consent to build one in the UK, but hands on experience of solar in dull winder weather just suggests that the watts aren't there !
I know of one or two people that get a good solar contribution, but they've used heat stores and huge collectors, had big capital investment, and still have to burn some other fuel.
Right, so with big collectors there is return.

Yes, there is a return, but not necessarily a lot of rate of return.

The ones I'm talking about cost hundreds of quid.

Well maybe so, but that doesn't guarantee any particular rate of return.

I suspect that a COP5 or better ground source heat pump in a super insulated building with good PASSIVE solar characteristics would be a better deal, simpler and with less kit !
Orders of magnitude more cost.
Well, you've offered nothing with even comparable payback, let alone better.

Without seeing the costs, designs and performances of both systems, I don't think you can make any such assertion.

(with one possible exception that I dont like)
Do tell ?
ok, but I dont propose using it. Wood battens screwed to the outside wall, polythene stretched over and stapled on. Thats it. In winter the outside of the wall is warmer due to greenhouse effect plus insulation effect, so reduced heat loss thru wall, and in some cases a small heat gain. IIRC payback is good, but the issues are horrible. Looks like crap, very vulnerable, needs peeling off every summer, and complete replacement every 4 years.

Hmmm... See what you mean !

because the UK doesn't have that many cold but bright days,
No need, we have enough insolation to make it work and pay its way.
I'm not convinced that we do in winter. I'd like to see your calculations on this if you've got any ?
I did calcs in full about 3 yrs ago, lemme go see if I've got them available...
no :( I didnt think it'd be on here. IIRC ROI was somewhere vaguely in the 30s % region.

OK - If you find them, I wouldn't mind a look at some point.

Space heating performs significantly differently to the more well known dhw because the output temp is much lower, and much more efficient mesh absorber panels can be used.
And these are more efficient in exactly what sense ?
I very much get the feeling youre not familiar with this tech.. Mesh absorbers have 2 or 3 layers of black mesh, and the air passes thru the mesh. The mesh is angled so that all the air against the front panel is air yet to go thru the mesh, which further reduces losses. The 2 or 3 layers of mesh means that losses from any but the frontmost mesh are partly recaptured. Air flow through the mesh maximises turbulence, maximising energy transfer from mesh to air. Couple this with the low temp output of air heating and you've got a panel that can run at 90% efficient.

But 90% efficient with what temperature rise ?
If it's 5C outside and you need three air changes per hour, how hot will it get the air ?
I've spent too many January days looking at delta T values of zero to be very convinced.
Unglazed ?

Flat HW panels dont get anything like that, their efficiency is way down when putting hot water out.

Indeed, but there's always going to be a trade off between efficiency and temperature.

- but many of the work best in orbit.
because passive solar design is more cost effective.
Unfortunately that one is too vague to know what you mean
Well go away and look it up then !
In that case I'm going to take a wild guess you may mean passive solar buildings. You must be aware that many techniques can be described as passive solar, your comment was pretty vague.
The above isnt much use for tens of millions of existing buildings, and ditto for many new builds. I think a cheaply fitted diy system with good ROI is of more utility myself.

Maybe. If it stacks up I'm happy, but most of the examples of solar space heating that I've seen have not been well regarded in terms of rate of return, and may of them don't seem to elegant to retrofit because of the ducting required.
And you are right - passive solar building design isn't a retrofit thing, but it is generally a fairy cheap approach when you are starting from scratch or extending.

universities, and there is a Nu Aire system on sale in the UK that we
maybe, but none of that is applicable to the solar space heating I'm referring to.
No - but they are all worth looking at.
Too expensive and complex to see widespread use or good ROI.

More expensive than you seem to have in mind I grant.

It also raises planning issues, which knowing the UK, may take decades to resolve.
Perhaps in some circumstances, but not across the board.
:) Build one then !!
Its on the to do list, but too many other things are as well. The small solar setup at the last place worked well, but I just dont have the time here. Maybe one day.

:) Know the feeling...
Cheers, J/. -- John Beardmore

In message , John Beardmore writes

..
My happiness is neither here or there. If you have a point, feel free to make it.
Two points really :
Up until a company tried selling a system to my parents, I was fairly neutral / sympathetic I now consider that the time for any half decent system to actually repay the investment is unrealistically long
Well - as I see it, it's up the individual to make up their own mind.

No, my point was simple maths really
take the example of my parents' proposed system
�7000, which on a 10 year return would have to save them �700 / year just on heating their water
it doesn't add up, does it ?

Consumers don't install these things to make me happy, but it does please me that these things have an environmental benefit, and in the long run, that they cost less than burning fossil fuels. That's enough for many people, and strikes them as environmentally and financially better than the conventional solution.

Feel good factor and ignorance

The other is that the anything we do in the UK is insignificant in comparison to the big three
If I cut my fossil fuel consumption, it is just as beneficial as somebody in China, India, or the US doing it.

Are you actually aware how fast China is building coal fired power stations?
Have you got a clue how many more Chinese there are than concerned Brits?

This tendency to abdicate personal responsibility because "anything we do in the UK is insignificant", not only makes it other peoples problem [who may be less well resourced / educated than us] - it makes it other peoples governments problem [which may be less well resourced / educated than us]. How blunt an instrument of change could you possibly devise ?

It's like trying to empty a pond with a teaspoon

What's worse, the Americans can justify inaction because the Chinese and Indian populations dwarf their own, and the Indian and Chinese can justify their inaction because individuals in the US have much higher per capita emissions.

And THERE lies the problem

There really does come a point where if you want to improve the situation, the best approach is just to do it, rather than lamenting the fact that somebody else is in a 'deadly embrace' of excuses.
Have you ever come across an LP "Lemmings" ?

You need to embrace it's philosophy
-- geoff

In message , raden writes

In message , John Beardmore wookie@wookie.demon.co.uk> writes ..
My happiness is neither here or there. If you have a point, feel free to make it.
Two points really :
Up until a company tried selling a system to my parents, I was fairly neutral / sympathetic I now consider that the time for any half decent system to actually repay the investment is unrealistically long
Well - as I see it, it's up the individual to make up their own mind.
No, my point was simple maths really
take the example of my parents' proposed system
�7000, which on a 10 year return would have to save them �700 / year just on heating their water
it doesn't add up, does it ?

Well firstly I don't know the spec of your parents system, but it does look as if they were getting ripped off, so that's not a great example.
Secondly, some people aren't exclusively concerned with ROI, and are willing to take a longer view that takes account of errrr... the long view, of eventual financial return, protection of global commons etc.
In essence, their behaviour illustrates how much they value the global commons and the resources they can save, by the amount of cash they are willing to spend protecting them. Introducing that term into the equation at least makes the use of a simplistic mathematical model to illustrate human behaviour look less broken.

Consumers don't install these things to make me happy, but it does please me that these things have an environmental benefit, and in the long run, that they cost less than burning fossil fuels. That's enough for many people, and strikes them as environmentally and financially better than the conventional solution.
Feel good factor and ignorance

Well no - a lot of very well informed and numerate people do these things, and they don't do it for show, green wash or to make money in the short term. They wouldn't feel good if it was a bad decision. It might be a bad decision if they only took the things you want to into account, but other people place [cash] values on other things.

The other is that the anything we do in the UK is insignificant in comparison to the big three
If I cut my fossil fuel consumption, it is just as beneficial as somebody in China, India, or the US doing it.
Are you actually aware how fast China is building coal fired power stations?
Have you got a clue how many more Chinese there are than concerned Brits?

Yes and yes, but this doesn't absolve individuals in the UK of their responsibilities, or reduce the benefit brought about by their actions.

This tendency to abdicate personal responsibility because "anything we do in the UK is insignificant", not only makes it other peoples problem [who may be less well resourced / educated than us] - it makes it other peoples governments problem [which may be less well resourced / educated than us]. How blunt an instrument of change could you possibly devise ?
It's like trying to empty a pond with a teaspoon

So ? No individual bestrides the planet. We are plankton, not gods, but that doesn't negate the point of our attempts to protect the environment any more than it negates any of our other actions.
In short - what defines us, is not the size of the shoal we are in, or even our individual size - it's what we choose to do with the resources at our disposal.
Behaving like a greedy ass all your life, and dying with most of the cash does not make you 'da man' ! You're still dead, and you were still a selfish git.

What's worse, the Americans can justify inaction because the Chinese and Indian populations dwarf their own, and the Indian and Chinese can justify their inaction because individuals in the US have much higher per capita emissions.
And THERE lies the problem

Well - one of them...

There really does come a point where if you want to improve the situation, the best approach is just to do it, rather than lamenting the fact that somebody else is in a 'deadly embrace' of excuses.
Have you ever come across an LP "Lemmings" ?

No.

You need to embrace it's philosophy

I wouldn't know. MP3 ?
I may know what you mean though. I remember one environmental meeting where the consensus emerged that
'maybe it isn't about saving the planet, maybe it's about going down with dignity',
but if we are 'going down', I don't feel the need to accelerate the process for short term cash gain.
Cheers, J/. -- John Beardmore

In message , John Beardmore writes

In message , raden <raden@kateda.org writes In message , John Beardmore wookie@wookie.demon.co.uk> writes ..
My happiness is neither here or there. If you have a point, feel free to make it.
Two points really :
Up until a company tried selling a system to my parents, I was fairly neutral / sympathetic I now consider that the time for any half decent system to actually repay the investment is unrealistically long
Well - as I see it, it's up the individual to make up their own mind.
No, my point was simple maths really
take the example of my parents' proposed system
�7000, which on a 10 year return would have to save them �700 / year just on heating their water
it doesn't add up, does it ?
Well firstly I don't know the spec of your parents system, but it does look as if they were getting ripped off, so that's not a great example.

Well, TBH, the company were very professional in their dealings (in the not making any major unjustified claims and quite willing to cancel when I got involved (Although that was prolly just good common sense)

Secondly, some people aren't exclusively concerned with ROI, and are willing to take a longer view that takes account of errrr... the long view, of eventual financial return,

What thirty years for pensioners ?

protection of global commons etc.

Feelgood factor

In essence, their behaviour illustrates how much they value the global commons and the resources they can save, by the amount of cash they are willing to spend protecting them. Introducing that term into the equation at least makes the use of a simplistic mathematical model to illustrate human behaviour look less broken.

No, it just shows that they've been pulled in by the hype

Consumers don't install these things to make me happy, but it does please me that these things have an environmental benefit, and in the long run, that they cost less than burning fossil fuels. That's enough for many people, and strikes them as environmentally and financially better than the conventional solution.
Feel good factor and ignorance
Well no - a lot of very well informed and numerate people do these things, and they don't do it for show, green wash or to make money in the short term.

Yes, but there are also lots of otherwise intelligent people who get religion, become latter day saints etc ...
.... means nothing

They wouldn't feel good if it was a bad decision.

That's where you're totally wrong

It might be a bad decision if they only took the things you want to into account, but other people place [cash] values on other things.
The other is that the anything we do in the UK is insignificant in comparison to the big three
If I cut my fossil fuel consumption, it is just as beneficial as somebody in China, India, or the US doing it.
Are you actually aware how fast China is building coal fired power stations?
Have you got a clue how many more Chinese there are than concerned Brits?
Yes and yes, but this doesn't absolve individuals in the UK of their responsibilities, or reduce the benefit brought about by their actions.

Do you have your teaspoon to hand ?

This tendency to abdicate personal responsibility because "anything we do in the UK is insignificant", not only makes it other peoples problem [who may be less well resourced / educated than us] - it makes it other peoples governments problem [which may be less well resourced / educated than us]. How blunt an instrument of change could you possibly devise ?
It's like trying to empty a pond with a teaspoon
So ? No individual bestrides the planet. We are plankton, not gods, but that doesn't negate the point of our attempts to protect the environment any more than it negates any of our other actions.
In short - what defines us, is not the size of the shoal we are in, or even our individual size - it's what we choose to do with the resources at our disposal.
Behaving like a greedy ass all your life, and dying with most of the cash does not make you 'da man' ! You're still dead, and you were still a selfish git.

Sorry, but laudable as you claim your actions to be, You are looking at having an insignificant effect
even worse, you feel you're making a difference - which is what I see as being dangerous
like offsetting carbon emissions when you fly

What's worse, the Americans can justify inaction because the Chinese and Indian populations dwarf their own, and the Indian and Chinese can justify their inaction because individuals in the US have much higher per capita emissions.
And THERE lies the problem
Well - one of them...

The big daddy one
If everyone donated the money they would have spent on a solar heating system to a "getting rid of George bush fund" it would be money far better spent

There really does come a point where if you want to improve the situation, the best approach is just to do it, rather than lamenting the fact that somebody else is in a 'deadly embrace' of excuses.
Have you ever come across an LP "Lemmings" ?
No.
You need to embrace it's philosophy
I wouldn't know. MP3 ?
I may know what you mean though. I remember one environmental meeting where the consensus emerged that
'maybe it isn't about saving the planet, maybe it's about going down with dignity',
but if we are 'going down', I don't feel the need to accelerate the process for short term cash gain.
Cheers, J/.

-- geoff

On 2006-11-21 17:14:58 +0000, David Hansen said:

On Tue, 21 Nov 2006 16:30:43 -0000 someone who may be "Mary Fisher" mary.fisher@zetnet.co.uk> wrote this:-
But if you organise your life it won't be _wasted_.
Indeed. I think it's a little like sorting out the recycling, cooking on the top of the cooker rather then the oven, growing vegetables, using a shower rather than a bath and many other things. It takes a little effort to get organised, but after that it's easy.
The key is encouraging people to organise these bits of their lives. if they do get organised then things like fortnightly bin collections are no problem.

This is complete and utter bullshit.
If there is value in recycling ( and that is highly questionable) then it is the responsibility of the collection organisation - ie. local authority or subcontractor to deal with it. They are paid a lot of money and should do their job. Fortnightly bin collections are not acceptable. It isn't clever, or green, just cheapness and unacceptable.
Secondly, I will organise my life to fit with what makes sense at the timer. If I want a shower, then that's what I'll havr, or if it's a bath then I'll go for that. I don't need greenwashing nonsense dictating how I conduct my activities, thanks. I'll make my own decisions on my criteria. I don't need others or things to organise my free choices.

On 2006-11-21 17:36:35 +0000, John Beardmore said:

In message , David Hansen SENDdavidNOhSPAM@spidacom.co.uk> writes On Tue, 21 Nov 2006 16:28:44 +0000 someone who may be John Beardmore wookie@wookie.demon.co.uk> wrote this:-
As long as she feels she is doing something, it's OK (whatever the reality of the situation is)
Well - the reality is that she IS doing something. Your blessing and approval are not required.
AOL. It is mildly amusing that the knockers have little to offer as an alternative.
:) Well - there's always nuclear, but let's not go there !
Cheers, J/.

On the contrary. That's precisely where we should go. Even the idiot, Blair has figured that out.