To think the ambitions for Net Carbon Zero are utterly impossible for most households?

[backoffice]

I’ve been looking at some of the suggestions that are supposed to be “normalised” for consumers to adopt as we move towards lower carbon: heat pumps, solar power, electric vehicles etc.

To adopt any of these is going to cost a family thousands of pounds! Not to mention the practicalities of e.g. heat pumps in tiny houses with little gardens/small roof. It seems utterly unreasonable to expect consumers to adopt these technologies unless they have a lot of money and large properties, but it’s basically what the government seems to expect people to do. AIBU?

I guess the no parking could be reduced ... but an ev and get given the space outside your home for personal parking might be popular

@araiwa

I havnt figured out how people who park on the street are going to charge their electric car yet, and that is the farthest ahead of all those technologies.

Do you have a petrol station at home?

Nope, but I can fill up in 5 mins. Charging a battery takes considerably longer than that.

We’re only getting an electric car because it’s on motability. Otherwise it would be way too expensive! We try to cut down our plastic use etc but as for things like solar panels, it’s just not happening 😢

Where I live there is only on-street parking so there is an electric car charging point in a lamp post. The more powerful ones are also in various car parks around town.

We need a new cooker, our current one is dual fuel but I’m thinking of replacing it with an electric one with induction hob as they are meant to be more efficient and I imagine gas cookers are also in line to be banned eventually. We also need to replace our bathroom so are going to add extra insulation when we do that. Stuff breaks and needs replacing on a regular basis so people need to make the right decision (but with regard given to their home’s specifics) each time the opportunity comes up - it’s an expense either way. I say the home’s specifics as we don’t have space for a heat pump - side return is too narrow, and there are pipes off the back of the house, and garden is too small for ground source. But that doesn’t mean that we can’t make the most eco choice we can when we need to replace other things.

What I think is good as well is that there is a minimum EPC rating for rental properties, although I think it needs to be higher. It’s a good way of putting the cost of improvements on wealthier people ie landlords. If I won the lottery I think I’d buy up loads of houses with rubbish EPCs, make them eco friendly and then sell them on at a loss.

What it comes down to is that if you don't have off-street parking, or local on street charging points and you don't park your car during the day at a workplace carpark or a public carpark, or the station carpark while you commute, and you use your car sufficiently that a weekly charge at the supermarket while you do your big shop won't be enough, and you definitely need a car and can't switch to public transport or pedal power. In that case you'll need to spend half an hour filling up your car at an ultra fast charge point rather than five minutes at a petrol pump. Sorry.

Or, I stick with petrol until my street gets charging points or my supermarket gets charging points or my workplace gets a charging point (ive just checked, the station doesnt have one either). There are 2 public charging points in my town of 10,000 people. Why would I jump now?

I quite agree Peony, people for whom it's currently inconvenient will understandably wait to switch until the infrastructure is more evolved.

But there are people who are arguing that banning the sale of ICE cars from 2030 is unacceptable because some people will never have a convenient local charging option that fits into their routine. When it comes to it those people will have to spend an extra 25 minutes at filling stations.

First things first, not only is 'net zero' impossible, it is completely unnecessary. On a global scale the UK produces a negligible amount of CO2, which in any event is not a pollutant but vital for life on Earth. It will be quietly abandoned over the next few years.

We can move to electric cars and home heating - not the useless ground source heat pumps, either - but it will take half a century if civil war is to be avoided. We need to stop all building and subsidising of wind farms, suspend any planned closure of gas or coal powered generators (and switch Drax back to coal rather than burning American trees while we are at it) and start fracking immediately. It is madness that we have billions of pounds worth of gas under our feet and yet have to buy gas from Russia. If this means facing down Big Wind, various Gazprom shills and their useful idiots, so be it.

In the longer term the only answer is nuclear, built and owned by the UK government rather than foreign multinationals, but that will take 20 years and a degree of political will our governments seem to have been incapable of for many years.

I'm guessing its showing in a rich/poor divide again. As there are people on the thread who cant see an issue, and I just cant see how it will happen. BUT, if there is a plan for the sort of quantity of chargers that you are talking about - public car parks, supermarkets, transport hubs, street chargers, big attractions (I guess places like Alton towers are going to need chargers?) then it becomes possible. I just can't see how it works when a town with around 50 filling PUMPS (each offering 3 fuels), drops to home or 2 alternatives..... the infrastructure just isnt around here yet. FWIW, I also looked at work availability of electric chargers. There is nothing within 5km, and I work in the centre of a small town.

You are not being unreasonable however note that it is entirely with government and industry's gift to substantially support us in minimising carbon footprint (e.g. through tax incentives, electrification of domestic heating and cooking, etc ...). They did it successfully with CFCs and the hole in the ozone layer, they need to take a similar legislative and industrial change approach to address climate change.

Yes we're a long way from where we need to be on electric car infrastructure but it's a distance that should be manageable within 5-10 years.
This is the answer to your Alton Towers example.

@LarryTheLurker

There is a lot I disagree with here, but just on a technical point. Yes CO2 is required at certain levels to sustain life, however it is a very fine balance and only needs a small increase in CO2 levels to become hazardous. Eg in the oceans where increased CO2 causes increased acidity, rendering it uninhabitable.

I don’t even recycle so am I fuck doing any of that unless it benefits me 😂

Hydrogen will increasingly be made using renewables, ie wind and wave and hydro power, nuclear if we have to. Hydrogen boilers or the new electric heat storage boilers (they are like one big super hot, super insulated storage heater that releases its heat as needed to run radiators etc. see vids on YouTube).
My 1850s house will never be able to be insulated to the standard required for a heat pump to heat it, it needs to be able to breathe for a start or the fabric of the building will deteriorate. Its a listed building and i wouldn't be allowed to cover it in a thick layer of exterior insulation covered in render (what the government schemes in Ireland seem to be doing).
Its going to be a mixture, hydrogen boilers and cars for those in flats, heat pumps, heat storage boilers bio fuel and plug in cars for houses with space.
Government grants and subsidiesfor new windows and insulation and boilers. Also good old active travel, public transport and wearing of jumpers in the house.
The amount of carbon released building new energy efficient homes is massive and would outway the savings from knocking down old houses.

Tbh whatever we as consumers do or don't do in the U.K. is going to have a negligible impact when a quarter of the G20 are doing fuck all

I hope you don’t have children @seaandsandcastles!

This guy (Just Have a Think) is very good at explaining the technology and issues:
<a class="break-all" href="https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=m.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3D7iazrwLr030&ved=2ahUKEwit5Mb8iaTzAhWegf0HHRJRDp0Qxa8BegQIChAF&usg=AOvVaw3Ow_-j1sHN29Fowd4G0B4R" rel="nofollow" target="blank">www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=m.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3D7iazrwLr030&ved=2ahUKEwit5Mb8iaTzAhWegf0HHRJRDp0Qxa8BegQIChAF&usg=AOvVaw3Ow-j1sHN29Fowd4G0B4R

@TuftyMarmoset

I hope you don’t have children *@seaandsandcastles*!

I do

How come you don’t recycle @seaandsandcastles? Out of interest

@backoffice

I don’t understand the hydrogen argument - how is it a good idea if it’s currently just coming from gas anyway?

Electric/nuclear is the only option isn’t it?

I’ve tried to look at improving my own home but I can’t afford it. With bills for university, subsidising elderly parents and saving for my own pension (all sensible things) there’s not the kind of money left over, although I want to make positive choices.

Am I being cynical wondering if the run-away energy bills are working in the governments favour to force people to use less energy?

Absolutely, at one point recently gas turbines made up 45% of our generation. Wood burning is 5% too so we've still got a huge way to go to decarbonise the grid. We need a substantial increase in nuclear capacity, somewhere in the range of 20GW.

They did it successfully with CFCs and the hole in the ozone layer, they need to take a similar legislative and industrial change approach to address climate change.

CFCs are a very spefic group of artificially-created chemicals that had a narrow range of uses for which less harmful alternatives were available. CO2 is a naturally occurring by-product of any process that involves the combustion of carbon-containing fuels (which covers pretty much all combustable fuels other than hydrogen). You can't simply legislate CO2 out of existence.

@Stickytreacle

Hydrogen can be produced from microbes and water splitting methods too, (caveat that this into is from my Dr son who works in the field as an automotive research scientist, I haven't a clue, but I know he and his colleagues have quite strong views on it. !)

Electrolysis of water is only viable if you've got plenty of cheap electricity. That's why it only accounts for 4% of production. The other 96% is extracted from gas, oil and coal.

@anothermansshoes

I guess the no parking could be reduced ... but an ev and get given the space outside your home for personal parking might be popular

That'll bring a new dimension to parking threads.

To reduce car use we need to go back to town planning. Everyone wants stuff "out of town" cheap land plenty parking. But actually it makes it very difficult to then service with public transport.

Get back to the days of thing being in the town centres and within walking distance. Where I live you'd struggle to buy an apple in the town centre, we have about 6 supermarkets Inc Lidl and Aldi but they are all in edge of town retail parks. With poor bus services. Meanwhile the council wonder why the town centre is dying.

That is a great point @Lockdownbear. We’ve designed towns to force people to use their cars if they want access to decent shops.