Fortsätt till huvudinnehåll

Energy efficiency in the home

I have just received an energy efficiency appraisal for my house, which is required before I can sell it. It contains advice on steps that could be taking to make it more efficient. These included
  • Fit low energy bulbs at a cost of £15 to save £23 a year
  • Upgrade heating controls at a cost of £350 - £450 to save £38 a year
  • Replace boiler with new condensing boiler at a cost of £1,500 - £3,500 to save £46 a year
  • Solar water heating £4,000 - £6,000 to save £33 a year
  • Replace single glazed windows with double glazed at a cost of £2,500 - £6,500 to save £70 a year
  • Fit photovoltaic panels at a cost of £11,000 - £20,000 to save £222 a year
Apart from the fitting of energy efficient lighting, of which the main benefit is that the units do not need to be changed so often, the payback times for most of the recommendations are between 30 and nearly 200 years! One then has to ask what is the embodied energy in these energy saving measures?

From which it can be concluded that the most effective energy-saving measure I could make would be to put on an extra layer of clothes.

One measure not suggested in the report was the use of a dehumidifier. In damp weather it can feel uncomfortably chilly even though the outside temperature is 15 degrees or more. It is then necessary to heat the building to around 25 degrees. By removing the moisture, the environment is comfortable at a lower temperature. A dehumidifier is also an efficient substitute for a tumbler drier, extracting the latent heat from the evaporating moisture and distributing it around the house as warm, dry air.

Kommentarer

Partially Random sa…
Hello, I know this isn't directly related to this piece (although I did enjoy reading it), but I have a question for you about LVT. I posted it on the Guardian but I don't think you will have seen it.

Here is my post in full:

"@Physiocrat

I have a question for you about LVT.

Say that people build on land and then provide private services, such as clinics or education, and this pushes up the value of land in the area (as services and perhaps skilled employment are within short distance), how then would you value the land on which these services are provided from?

Take, say, a good private school or a clinic, or even a railway station, which adds x amount of value to the surrounding land. Since the property(hypothetically) increases the value of the surrounding land itself, but in order to value the land you should discount the value of the property... then won't you necessarily overestimate the value of the land the school or clinic is built upon since the value of the land it is built upon is related to the service that the building provides?

I would appreciate your thoughts."
22 oktober 2011 kl. 23:38
Physiocrat sa…
Good question. It answer is the same as if everyone in your street improves their house eg restores old buildings, repaints, plants their gardens, etc. This enhances the value of your land even if you do nothing. This is what we mean when we say that land value is created and sustained by the presence and activities of the community.

Each site is valued in turn, on the assumption that it were vacant but that everything around was as it is.
31 oktober 2011 kl. 16:35
Skicka en kommentar

Populära inlägg i den här bloggen

The dreadfulness of British governance

I wrote to my MP on two entirely separate issues recently. The first was to do with the replacement for the Inter City 125 train, which at £2.6 million per vehicle, is twice as expensive as it ought to be. The second concerned the benefits of a switch from business rate and Council Tax to a tax based on site values. In both cases, the replies were full of spurious, unsubstantiated assertions and completely flawed arguments. This is typical. You will not get an iota of sense from the government on any area of public policy at all - finance, economics, trade and employment, agriculture, housing, health, transport, energy. All junk. If you write to your MP you will invariably receive answers that are an insult to your intelligence, no matter what subject you are writing about. Of course they cannot understand statistics. They are innumerate. Whitehall is staffed with idiots with a high IQ. Look at their IT projects. And mind your purse, they will have that too.
Skicka en kommentar
Läs mer

How much more will the British tolerate?

The British are phlegmatic, tolerant and slow to rouse. Thus there was no great reaction after the terrorist attack in July 2005. The murder of Lee Rigby created a sense of outrage, but nothing more, since it appeared to be an isolated incident. Two serious incidents within a fortnight are another matter. Since the first major terrorist incident in 2001, authority has tried to persuade the public that Islam is a religion of peace, that these were isolated events, or the actions of deranged "lone wolves", having nothing to do with Islam, or to reassure that the chances of being killed in a terrorist attack were infinitesimally small. These assurances are are beginning to wear thin. They no longer convince. If government does not act effectively, people will take the law into their own hands. What, however, would effective action look like? What sort of effective action would not amount to rough justice for a lot of innocent people? Given the difficulties of keeping large n...
Skicka en kommentar
Läs mer

Importing people to sustain demand

I got involved in a discussion with a Youtuber called “Philosophy all along”. This was in connection with criticism of Trump’s policy of deporting illegal migrants, which he argued would be bad for the economy as it would reduce demand. This implies that there is a need to import people to sustain demand. There is no obvious reason why a population should not be able to consume everything that the same population produces. If it can not, then something else is going on. It is a basic principle that wages are the least that workers will accept to do a job. Wages are a share of the value added by workers through their wages. The remainder is distributed as economic rent, after government has taken its cut in taxes. Monopoly profit is a temporary surplus that after a delay gets absorbed into economic rent. Land values in Silicon Valley are an example of this; it's like a gold rush. The miners get little out of it. Rent and tax syphon purchasing power away from those who produce the g...
Skicka en kommentar
Läs mer