I hate sloppy reporting . . .

[Oldgreybeard]

I think the sentence would have been better just adding 3 words and an Oxford comma.

Enel's Francesco Starace said bringing prices down depends on new sources of energy such as renewables, and the use of heat pumps.

I agree, that makes a whole lot more sense. My experience has been that heat pumps reduce the electricity demand such that it is feasible to use self-generated RE to heat our house, so as an adjunct to installing PV they work well.

[Mart]

I think the sentence would have been better just adding 3 words and an Oxford comma.

Enel's Francesco Starace said bringing prices down depends on new sources of energy such as renewables, and the use of heat pumps.

I agree, that makes a whole lot more sense. My experience has been that heat pumps reduce the electricity demand such that it is feasible to use self-generated RE to heat our house, so as an adjunct to installing PV they work well.

And in addition to reducing overall energy consumption, hopefully they also reduce gas consumption net.

I don't think I'm cheating here, but if a HP is added (instead of GCH), then it will increase leccy demand, and leccy generation. So whilst I'm not a fan of the marginal argument*, it can pedantically be said that the demand will be met by demand following gas generation.

So 1kWh of gas in an efficient boiler adds 0.9kWh(t) to the house.
1kWh of gas burned at a powerstation generates about 0.55kWh of leccy, then with 8-12% losses (hopefully less), 0.5kWh reaches the house, and at an average UK seasonal COP of 2.9, provides 1.45kWh(t).

Or working backwards, to provide 0.9kWh(t) from a HP, you'd need to burn (1/1.45) x 0.9 = 0.62kWh of gas at a CCGT powerstation ...... I think.

*The marginal argument as used by some critics of BEV's, heatpumps etc, is that (for example) your BEV runs on 100% gas leccy as it's extra demand on top of normal demand.

This is to counter claims that BEV's, HP's and all leccy consumption, is getting lower carbon as RE rolls out. It's a weird spin logic, and mostly pointless. Especially if the new leccy devices go hand in hand with new demand side PV.

[Stinsy]

I think the sentence would have been better just adding 3 words and an Oxford comma.

Enel's Francesco Starace said bringing prices down depends on new sources of energy such as renewables, and the use of heat pumps.

^this

[spread-tee]

As Gus said earlier, we all rely on some bastardisation of our language to convey our meanings which a wide range of people understand. Technically it may be incorrect, but as long as the meaning comes through accurately all is well. Most of us here have a reasonable grasp of the technicalities of energy, power, heat, specific heat etc etc etc, so we pick up on these issues. But I would bet a lot of us hoover the carpet, even if you have a Dyson? Or maybe you don't fall into that trap because you know Hoover is a make not a process, so you vacuum the carpet, but that is another gotcha, where is the Vacuum? All you are doing is reducing the air pressure a bit and using the airflow to gather dust, you're sucking the carpet.

But that doesn't work either, there is no such thing as suck, the higher pressure air around the nozzle is providing the force to shove the air into the pipe, your machine just provided a local low pressure area for the atmosphere to exploit, which is a product of gravity, and hey presto we are back to the big bang.

All of which is a little thought experiment on why we bastardise our language to provide clarity without getting tied in knots, we all do it a lot, take this sentence, curtesy of OGB

I agree, that makes a whole lot more sense. My experience has been that heat pumps reduce the electricity demand such that it is feasible to use self-generated RE to heat our house, so as an adjunct to installing PV they work well.

What energy did you self generate there OGB? you know that should have be self harvested or similar?

We all do it, I am happy to cut the reporters some slack some of the time TBH

Desp

[Oldgreybeard]

I think the sentence would have been better just adding 3 words and an Oxford comma.

Enel's Francesco Starace said bringing prices down depends on new sources of energy such as renewables, and the use of heat pumps.

I agree, that makes a whole lot more sense. My experience has been that heat pumps reduce the electricity demand such that it is feasible to use self-generated RE to heat our house, so as an adjunct to installing PV they work well.

And in addition to reducing overall energy consumption, hopefully they also reduce gas consumption net.

I don't think I'm cheating here, but if a HP is added (instead of GCH), then it will increase leccy demand, and leccy generation. So whilst I'm not a fan of the marginal argument*, it can pedantically be said that the demand will be met by demand following gas generation.

So 1kWh of gas in an efficient boiler adds 0.9kWh(t) to the house.
1kWh of gas burned at a powerstation generates about 0.55kWh of leccy, then with 8-12% losses (hopefully less), 0.5kWh reaches the house, and at an average UK seasonal COP of 2.9, provides 1.45kWh(t).

Or working backwards, to provide 0.9kWh(t) from a HP, you'd need to burn (1/1.45) x 0.9 = 0.62kWh of gas at a CCGT powerstation ...... I think.

*The marginal argument as used by some critics of BEV's, heatpumps etc, is that (for example) your BEV runs on 100% gas leccy as it's extra demand on top of normal demand.

This is to counter claims that BEV's, HP's and all leccy consumption, is getting lower carbon as RE rolls out. It's a weird spin logic, and mostly pointless. Especially if the new leccy devices go hand in hand with new demand side PV.

I think you may be right, but for us our heating choice was electricity, oil or LPG. Open fires or any sort of combustion device with a flue inside the house was a non-starter, for airtightness reasons, and LPG and oil were both massively more costly than electricity, so our choice of heating was a bit restricted. For those on the gas grid that argument would have been harder to make at the time, but for us a heat pump was a no-brainer.

[Oldgreybeard]

What energy did you self generate there OGB? you know that should have be self harvested or similar?

We all do it, I am happy to cut the reporters some slack some of the time TBH

Desp

We generate around 6,000kWh/year on average, from a south facing 25 panel PV array. We now use a lot more of this that we used to, before fitting the batteries we could only use about half of it. We're now using around 98% to 99% of it, and can easily run the heat pump and the house for up to around 10 to 12 hours from the batteries if we really need to.

Arguably the ~3,000kWh that we used to export helped the grid, whereas now it only helps us, but it's probably still a marginal net benefit, given the losses in the grid.

[spread-tee]

What energy did you self generate there OGB? you know that should have be self harvested or similar?

We all do it, I am happy to cut the reporters some slack some of the time TBH

Desp

We generate around 6,000kWh/year on average, from a south facing 25 panel PV array. We now use a lot more of this that we used to, before fitting the batteries we could only use about half of it. We're now using around 98% to 99% of it, and can easily run the heat pump and the house for up to around 10 to 12 hours from the batteries if we really need to.

Arguably the ~3,000kWh that we used to export helped the grid, whereas now it only helps us, but it's probably still a marginal net benefit, given the losses in the grid.

Tongue in cheek mode......

Ah, but you don't GENERATE/b]that energy, it's already there in the form of high energy photons, you converted them to Electrons and then converted them in turn to chemical energy in your batteries..................and so on .

your reporting is sloppy Sir

Desp

[Mart]

As Gus said earlier, we all rely on some bastardisation of our language to convey our meanings which a wide range of people understand. Technically it may be incorrect, but as long as the meaning comes through accurately all is well. Most of us here have a reasonable grasp of the technicalities of energy, power, heat, specific heat etc etc etc, so we pick up on these issues. But I would bet a lot of us hoover the carpet, even if you have a Dyson? Or maybe you don't fall into that trap because you know Hoover is a make not a process, so you vacuum the carpet, but that is another gotcha, where is the Vacuum? All you are doing is reducing the air pressure a bit and using the airflow to gather dust, you're sucking the carpet.

But that doesn't work either, there is no such thing as suck, the higher pressure air around the nozzle is providing the force to shove the air into the pipe, your machine just provided a local low pressure area for the atmosphere to exploit, which is a product of gravity, and hey presto we are back to the big bang.

All of which is a little thought experiment on why we bastardise our language to provide clarity without getting tied in knots, we all do it a lot, take this sentence, curtesy of OGB

I agree, that makes a whole lot more sense. My experience has been that heat pumps reduce the electricity demand such that it is feasible to use self-generated RE to heat our house, so as an adjunct to installing PV they work well.

What energy did you self generate there OGB? you know that should have be self harvested or similar?

We all do it, I am happy to cut the reporters some slack some of the time TBH

Desp

Complete digression ..... I apologise, but your comments and the fact that we all play on words, especially the english language and the way it allows for ambiquity :

He walked down the stairs in his pyjama's. Strange place to have a staircase!

made me recall a couple of old statements and jokes. For instance, does gravity exist, or does the Earth suck.

But back to your vacuum, I recall a test asking the question, is nothing stronger than a rugby team?

Followed by a tug of war with half a rugby team on each end of the ropes, and in the centre the ropes attached to two halves of a dome. Then some air was sucked out of the dome, and the team couldn't pull it apart.

So we got two fun plays, one that 'nothing' is stronger than the rubgby team, and the fact that they didn't really achieve nothing in the dome, just less.

No f...ing idea why I'm posting this.

[Oldgreybeard]

I remember having great fun in the pub, years ago, trying to convince a farmer that gravity held his walls up . . .

made me recall a couple of old statements and jokes. For instance, does gravity exist, or does the Earth suck.

But back to your vacuum, I recall a test asking the question, is nothing stronger than a rugby team?

Followed by a tug of war with half a rugby team on each end of the ropes, and in the centre the ropes attached to two halves of a dome. Then some air was sucked out of the dome, and the team couldn't pull it apart.

So we got two fun plays, one that 'nothing' is stronger than the rubgby team, and the fact that they didn't really achieve nothing in the dome, just less.

No f...ing idea why I'm posting this.

A variation on the famous Magdeburg hemispheres demonstration: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magdeburg_hemispheres

[Mr Gus]

I think the sentence would have been better just adding 3 words and an Oxford comma.

Enel's Francesco Starace said bringing prices down depends on new sources of energy such as renewables, and the use of heat pumps.

I'm in agreement, except for the obvious wasted opportunity to sell the premise to the public of 1 unit energy in 3 units as heat / cooling out compared to 1 in 1 out under normal household kits operation ..& ASHP needs selling to the public because it confuses them & therefore bores the butt off them.

Stick a sign by an ashp in a doctors waiting room indoor unit saying, "delivers 3 units of heat from 1 unit of power" & you'd get questions asked daily as to "how" !?