Here in the Derbyshire Peak District as I write it's about two degrees below
freezing. A thick rind of frost covers the field above the house, where
grass is sharp as ice and the earth an iron-hard crust. No birds sing. All
is still, apparently lifeless.
But pick up a trenching spade. Four feet down there's another, warmer world.
The soil is about 6C, not very different winter or summer, day or night:
temperatures down there rise and dip only gently with the weather and the
seasons.
My field — and our whole island — is a giant storage heater. And it's heating
the house. Warm water courses through the radiators, and the bath and
showers are piping hot. We have no gas here, no oil-fired boiler. The source
of all this heat is the field outside.
Early this year I described my plans for ground-source energy. Radiators were
being put in, floors were up. Diggers were churning the field and there were
trenches, heaps of earth and rocks everywhere. Four hundred metres of thick
black PVC pipe lay coiled by the drive like a monstrous snake, waiting for
the trenches to house it, and 200 tonnes of sand had arrived to sheath the
piping.
I explained — and will not repeat at length — the principle of ground-source
heating, in which energy is harvested from tens of thousands of tonnes of
earth, and transferred by a heat pump (the same technology as a
refrigerator) into a few hundred litres of water. The latter is greatly
warmed, the former very slightly cooled. Energy is not created, but moved
and concentrated. That is the theory.
Well, the news is that it works. The system is simple to operate, reliable,
responsive, quiet and efficient, the house is warm as toast, and the
electricity bill (I used to have storage heaters) is plummeting. But the
pump cost about £7,000 and the groundworks cost as much again. The planning
bureaucracy was irksome and the mess horrendous. It was not strictly an
economic decision. I did it out of interest, and because it's good to be a
pioneer.
Yet the project has come quite close to making economic sense. Next (depending
on the planners) I hope to invest in solar and wind energy. When both houses
on our property are heated by ground source, we should have home-generated
electricity left over to sell back into the national grid. The economics
overall will then depend on the price that the electricity utility offers
customers like me for our power.
In short, the practical and business case for my eco-energy project, and
likewise for hundreds of thousands of citizens' green household dreams,
depends at a number of key stages upon government. Overall:
1) Are there subsidies?
2) Is the planning system for or against us?
3) Do our national tariff structures for energy encourage or discourage
private household investment?
Based on my experience so far, my answers are: 1) small and rather confusing
subsidies do exist; 2) the planning system is against us; and 3) the price
incentive for householders contemplating feeding the national grid is
pitifully inadequate: a fraction of what is offered, say, to the swelling
ranks of private generators in Germany.
Over to you, Gordon Brown, Hilary Benn and your fellow ministers. Government
in Britain needs to learn to sing a new song. Interviewed from the Bali
climate talks on the Today programme yesterday, Mr Benn was singing the old
song.
It isn't governments that buy airline tickets, said the Environment Secretary:
people do. He was being challenged by his interviewer, John Humphrys, to
explain why the Government is allowing Heathrow (and, with it, air travel)
to expand massively at a time when we are trying to curb global emissions.
Mr Benn's implied argument was that government sets the carbon cap: if we
insist on flying then that is our choice, but we may have to do a lot less
of something else to pay for it.
But would he say what it was we might “choose” to do a lot less of? Getting an
answer from him was like trying to get blood from a stone. Finally the
minister was driven to whimpering about low-energy light bulbs. Mr Benn
seemed doggedly reluctant to agree (as Mr Humphrys kept pressing him to)
that in any important way we British might have to learn to live differently.
British ministers talk about climate change in the way many Christians talk
about their faith. If they believed only half of what they profess, then the
knowledge would surely have galvanised them, shaken them rigid; they would
be grabbing us by our lapels and begging us, imploring us, commanding us, to
repent.
My climate-change faith is flimsier. I don't believe in half the certainties
of “the science” to which ministers subscribe — who knows how much of this
climate change may be cyclical, how much irreversible, and how much is
caused by us? Have scientists really (I doubt it) got the numbers, the
levers, the timings right? — yet I am sure our planet is running out of
fossil fuels and that there is a good chance that burning them is
contributing to climate change. We don't need better arguments than these to
conclude that we should find alternative sources of energy and new ways of
saving energy; and, having found them, to make it worth people's while to
switch.
I never thought I would write this, but Hilary should listen to his
infuriating old dad, Tony. Tony Benn believes in the power — and the duty —
of the State to change the way citizens live. On this issue, and from the
other end of the ideological spectrum, I do too.
So dazzled by the Emerald City of market economics and personal choice have
both the Centre Left and the Centre Right become that they seem to have
forgotten that, even though the market may be as much a force of nature as
the wind, a sailing ship still needs a navigator at the helm. Government is
the navigator, and there are rocks ahead. Government must bribe or bully us
into making different choices.
Planning disincentives should be cut and financial incentives increased. Only
government can do this. Whopping new taxation is needed to encourage good
husbandry in energy. Only government can do this. In particular, the case
for road pricing is now overwhelming. Only government can do this. Yet
everything I know about Gordon Brown tells me he will shortly shy at the
road-pricing fence; and everything I know about the Tories tells me that
they're unlikely to whip him on.
Which is a shame, because I believe the British people are ready to be shown a
lead, ready to alter our own behaviour so long as others are made to pull
their weight too. What we are not disposed to do is make gloriously quixotic
personal sacrifices all on our own. If the Government could find the guts to
require change, and apply those requirements to all of us, millions of my
fellow citizens would react not with anger but relief. Ask your father,
Hilary: the people need instruction.
Microgeneration is one of the most expensive ways of tackling climate change. For many areas the urban wind resource is tiny, leaving only solar pv as the only other alternative. It costs around £30k to equip an average house with solar panels to cover it's electricity production. This equates to an electricity cost of around 30 pence per unit, or an annual electrcity bill of over 1200 pounds per year. This is four times as expensive as electricity from an onshore wind farm, five times as expensive as nuclear power and four times as expensive as offshore wind.
Only rich households can afford the capital costs of microgeneration, any tariff which would encourage people to install it, would have to be paid for by a levy on other electricity consumers, ie poor consumers subsidise rich consumers to be green. This doesn't strike me as particularly equitable.
By all means be green but don't expect the rest of us to pay for it when there are cheaper options available.
Allan, Swindon, UK
I have experienced this typeof heating and found it to be wanting. Radiators do not heat to anyhere near a conventional system and I'm not sure that the financial benefits are as good as has been touted. In addition, the radiators were some 30% larger than their counterparts. Most heating installers I contacted were often quite disparaging about this system, although there may be an ulterior motive there that passed me by. Like many, I feel the public are being battered into submission on a range of issues by hype and scaremongering. I read that the earth naturally produces 95% of all carbon emissions: is this correct? If so, what tangible effect would the U.K have even if it reaches zero emissions?
Previous governments, who all had the power to 'change the way citizens live' did so and continue to do so, for short-term political gain. We need real, visionary leadership - not just a 'pretty ordinary guy'. This is why people cannot be bothered to vote - paucity of quality and hope.
Alan Theobald, London,
heat pumps work on a ratio of around 1:4 so if the pump uses one kw of electricity it produces 4 kws of heat.
Ground source heat pumps use weather compensation control technology which is used on gas boilers (in fact weatther compensation is obligatory in Germany for all new boilers)
Ground source heat pumps use this weather compensation control technology as it enables fewer kilowatts of heat to be used over a longer period...much like corectly installed condensing boilers.. (Note weather compensation is the only way of ensruing heating systems are efficient)
alec morrow, London,
I am looking into installing a system into my property in Sheffield. I have looked on the net and found that Eco heat Pumps offer a cash back of £2500.
I have a friend with a digger, whom says he could do the trench in about 2 days, so it should not cost too much.
I am simply glad to hear that they do work, and they provide hot water.
Has any one else installed one of these, and what are there thoughts.
James, Sheffield , South Yorkshire
Technical question: how much electricity does the heat pump use, and how many KwH of heat does it pump into the house?
Tim Cecil, Dinan, France
Matthew, you have cracked it !
We can save the planet if all houses are built with an adjoining field.
It is so simple, I cannot understand why no one thought of it sooner.
David Tomlinson, Poole, Dorset
How long do all of the renewable energy systems take to payback the energy used to manufacture them?
Are they worth installing or do they also have negative net contribution to global warming?
Anyway Matthew has a good warm feeling.
Alan Davis, Colyford, UK
Gosh, I wish I could afford all that piping and digging for such heating; but then I am not an M.P. on such a fantastic and undeserved salary plus mouth watering 'expenses'. Would this be your first or second home you are talking about in which M.P.'s can claim all kinds of alowances for?
Michael S., Fethiye, Turkey
Why can’t the government cut VAT on solar panels and wind turbines to make them more cost effective for the average home user? You can only use them to generate clean power and they have no other use. It seems the whole Green agenda is a tax raising exercise and they have no real commitment to really reducing Co2.
Steve, London, England
Only government can change us really - the UK works that way at present.
Smoking is a good example of regulation affecting health, however governments elsewhere achieved the same with out quite such severe measures, New Zealand being one.
Perhaps many people prefer the government here to lead, rather than thinking through ideas for themselves.
Steve Doole, London, UK
I'm fascinated by the ground source heating, it sounds fantastic.
However, with regard to the government bullying us into efficiency with such schemes as road pricing I have a major concern. And that concern is the other factor besides efficiency in global warming which is the size of the population.
This government, like governments before it has allowed almost uncontrolled immigration into the UK and had no overall population policy.
To the Earth it matters not one iota wether the amount of pollution is produced efficiently by lots of people or inefficiently by a few. The only thing that counts (to the Earth) is the total amount produced.
Road pricing is just another way for the government to attempt to make us behave ever more efficiently and avoid the issue of numbers.
Kevin Smith, Great Waldingfield, England
You can tell environmentalism is becoming a religion by the way believers don’t think they have to argue a case anymore. The article professes doubt about the scientific arguments for climate change but insists we should behave as if it were true any way. The greens are a bit like a like a Church of England congregation going through the motions but not really believing in all that stuff about the holy ghost. As with all religions I remain an atheist.
Alan Trent, London, UK
Matthew, your heart is in the right place. We do need, however, ways to do stuff for folks who live little lives in little homes in big towns. Key things: 1)insulation. I had 'Space Blanket' put in the loft. It's NOt just rockwool, it has a top reflective coat of silvery mylar, so it reflects infrared. Cut our gas units used by 20-25%. Putting insulation into homes would cost relatively little; we need to upgrade the existing housing stock.
P Whitehead, Walsall, UK
Has anone considered organising an energy mortgage that has a payback period linked to the energy savings.
Supposing say Mathew's costs take 70 years to pay back at today's energy costs, then take a separate energy mortgage that automatically transfers to the next owners until payback has been achieved. If energy costs continue to rise the next owner would take over the energy mortgage with every likelihood that the energy mortgage cost would be lower than the energy costs that would otherwise be payable.
No coercion there.
Fred Keeling, almunecar, spain
Matthew, what are you talking about with "even though the market... a sailing ship still needs a navigator at the helm." Don't you understand what was meant by "the invisible hand"? The whole point is that markets don't need navigators to alight on the best allocations. What they need is regulation to make sure externalities (e.g. pollution suffered by others) are included in the choices people make, but Hillary Benn is right not to make people's choices for them.
And when governments start making those choices for us, it's time to take to the streets...
ja, London,
More utter rubbish about road tolls. Before road tolls are in place people will be able to purchase hydrogen fuel cell cars, usable electric cars and myriad hybrid cars. The environmental case against cars is based on ignorance and politics and not reality - Shame on you
Sean Corker, Manchester, UK
its very well for people ho own a field next to their house and have lots of money to waste installing the system. what about the rest of us normsl mortals with average homes and small gardens?
SHK, ludlow, uk
The Government is in a mess on this as many other issues.
I am trying to restore a grade 2 house, but I cannot have
Georgian style double glazed windows. The council officer says "lots of people do not have double glazing"
Lets get real about this. Either we care about energy conservation or we don't. And if we don't lets stop pretending.
MEC
michael Corby, London, England
So all I need is enough money to buy a big house with plenty of land, although I don't need either, so that I can yell about my green credentials by having somebody dig it all up to put a heat pump in. And here's me thinking this would be difficult. Pity about those poor buggers who live in towns and cities, or blocks of flats, they're all doomed!
David Leslie, Perth, Scotland
The government use 'green' to raise revenue. All possible properties should have photovoltaic cells installed in their roofs and every opportunity for installing geothermic heating generators in building projects, certainly free of VAT and subsidised where necessary.
Piddling around with low energy light bulbs is ridiculous considering how much damage is being done by China, India and Russia with their emmissions. Every effort should be made to find a viable alternative to petrol to power vehicles and initially the new vehicles should be made affordable to encourage uptake in the mass market.
Penny, London, UK
There's a confused practicality to this, but not a generally applicable answer.
On roads, tolls work. Toll road in th US are readily accepted (although people still drive to the same extent).
On green energy, physics aside, energy generation by some sort of oxidative process will continue to be the most ready source of distributable power. Home/community generators offer the most efficient, affordable and readily operated sources of local energy and local management. The question of how these generators are fueled will be the distributed responsibility that public can embrace.
Generally speaking, where has the money for roads and power generation gone? Certainly power demands are greater, but road and rail property hasn't increased to the same extent. Is it the bureaucracy and legislation that has made building and planning so much more expensive that acts as a sink for these funds?
trevor , liverpool,
We investigated ground source heat pumps backed up by a wind turbine to provide electricity to drive the pumps and discovered that -
a) We did not need planning permission for the heat pump as nothing would be showing above ground. While the wind turbine slid passed our local planning authorities with ease and is now on site waiting to be commisiioned.
b) Sand was not the ideal heat source therefore in Suffolk air- source heat pumps were the better option.
Sarah Brownie, Sandy Suffolk.
Sarah Brownie, Bury St Edmunds,
Makes me smile all these save the planet people who keep endlessly talking about using light bulbs costing five quid each to conserve energy. Meanwhile....... the supermarkets are doing great fantasic profitable business selling frozen ready to eat meals which either require a refrigerator and a microwave oven.
Almost every house has a microwave oven and many homes have two fridges which consume electricity at a fair rate of knots, and supermarkets and other business's have hundreds of miles of fridges to store food. If you wish to save energy switch the fridges off ! No chance !
Phil de Buquet, Newport, england
The most effective way to reduce energy on domestic heating is to live modestly in a double glazed flat with no more than essential accommodation eg no seperate dining room, no more than one extra bedroom, only one bathroom. My partner and I keep our, albeit reasonably spacious, three room k & b flat at 20C twenty four hours a day. The central heating however hardly ever kicks in. Today has been very cold and now, at 7.40 pm, it is 0C outside but I am walking around bare foot. Our radiators were last on at 4.00 am when I got up to go for a pee. Our friends in their, often non too warm, large Edwardian or Victorian houses or rambling country residences marvel at our low gas bills.
James, London, UK
Another obvious green thing you can do Matthew, is to be satisfied with just one home, which would obviate the need to consume carbon in travelling from one to the other, and while you’re about it, perhaps you could have a word with some of your friends in the chattering classes who “live in London and the Cotswolds†or “share their time between their flat in London and their cottage in Derbyshire†and so on. And don't be coy about it. You mentioned in one of your articles some time ago that you had more than one home.
Stephen Munslow, Birmingham, UK
We're a selfish species. We want it all , we want it now, and we want it as cheaply as possible. In a country where the patio heater and "sustainable" hardwood garden furniture are regarded as okay, we aren't going to get any joined up thinking on the energy problem. Much as I agree with Matthew Parris that the government needs to take a lead on this, I don't honestly think we will get any guidance from a bunch of people who's only ambition seems to be staying in power. What is needed is a change in the way people live, and a change to the unsustainable consumer society. I don't remember the government being pioneers of recycling and I don't think they will be at the forefront of any change in energy use.
michelle, Cambridge, UK
Whatever we do to save our planet, the fundamental thing we have to do is stop breeding at the current rate. The very MOST we should do is simply replicate ourselves - two children per couple. Otherwise the underlying problem can never be corralled.
Jane scott, London, UK
Prof Fells is a charlatan and for 15 years he has withheld the truth that the "laws of Physics" are trash.
I gave him Diagram 4 at www.unifiedtheory.org.uk/, back in 1992. He wrote me confirming receipt.
If he dares deny this information in public ... he is a brain dead fool and conman professor in need of Psychiatric Counselling.
Alan Cresswell, Birmingham, England
How did we all get caught up in this bizarre End of the World Cult, where the sacraments involve changing lightbulbs. It's easy to see how McCarthyism or Maoism caught on.
John Ledbury, Kings Lynn, England
Basically what you are saying is that on Green Issues the government as usual is all talk(sorry spin).If they got rid of all the numerous quangos dealing with the issues and put the money in easy to understand subsidies we would probibly have the birth of a new industry.
Also people always talk about all these problems being "green",I would prefer it that we talk about "waste".It is a waste of natural resources that we do not use them,like:waste wood for fuel,ground source heat ,the suns heat,the wind ,the waves,tidal power etc.All these sources are wasted for options that will ultimately run out(ok except nuclear).
Nigel Wheatcroft, wimbledon,
Well Matthew you seem to be another relatively wealthy person who goes green for fashionable reasons. Where do the mass of less well off get their fields from to instal their heat pumps. Perhaps you could persuade Prince Charles and other large land owners to contribute their land.
Doug George, Antibes, France
I now live in France and I am in the process of building a new house. The French government is giving me a 50% tax credit (which means you get a refund if your tax bill is less than the credit) for the installation of geothermal heating. This has been available for some time and as a result there is no shortage of contractors available to do the work. You can also get the same tax credit for installation of a high efficiency wood-burning stove (which is eco-friendly as wood is a renewable energy source). So, if the French government can do this why not the British? Is it a reflection of each's commitment to encouraging change? Time, I think, to put your money where your mouth is Mr Brown. Oops, forgot, you've already squandered it all and there is none left.
Derek Morris, Salies de Bearn, France
I agree. All new houses and flats should have solar panels etc designed into them and there should be significant subsidies (no VAT?) for installing such things in older properties.
Where can I get information on your ground source energy project? Have you written about it?
Nick
Nick Moynihan, Happy Valley, Hong Kong
Why stop at Tony Benn?
Damn reason, genuine science and individual rights - why not embrace every form of coercion?
Just as the "educated" classes upheld socialism as the ideal in the last century, causing mass suffering, now we must repent and obey in the name of this new "green" ideology - and suffer the disastrous consequences!
Seb Nash, London,
I'd prefer to go with Louis B Meyer - "No one ever got rich by over-estimating the intelligence of the audience."
We've tried rational discourse, we've tried shouting, we've tried subsidies, we've tried taxes. All that's left is insulting the public's intelligence - perhaps with a fuel-cell powered car which ONLY runs on hydrogen electrolysed from purest Buxton spring water. I'll wager you couldn't build them fast enough....
Ian Kemmish, Biggleswade, UK
You've got the government's behaviour exactly right here. The Americans, for all their shameful obstructiveness at Bali, are at least being honest about their behaviour. Expanding Heathrow sends all the wrong signals, it tells people "we're talking green but not acting green". The govt and the public must act together to cut emissions.
The main cause of climate change is human carbon. Natural cycles are overlaid onto this, and without these the past few years would probably have been even hotter. The next time we get a hotter year we'll see some pretty devastating heatwaves, and politicians might finally be moved to take serious action. It seems that only when people get scared, really scared, will the drive to cut emissions really get going.
Dr Richard Milne, Edinburgh,
So what are you saying Matthew? That people with a big enough piece of land to have a heat pump (lets call them millionaires) should get a subsidy to improve their properties?
At the same time, you'd jack up retrogressive taxes like fuel tax and road pricing.
Sounds to me like the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
Redcliffe, London,
If you don't have large amounts of land, you can actually drill a hole into the ground, (or two at approx. 70 m) with the same effect. It is a very good solution. However the costs of installing it are quite high. With rising fuel prices it will be worth in the long run.
Dan, Zurich,
If we lived in an age when every rood of land maintained its man, ground source heat pumps might be suitable.
The population is now 60 million, necessitating industrial-scale solutions. An extreme Mount St Helens or Krakatoa could fill the atmosphere with dust and overwhelm all these natural power sources.
As an illustration, look outside, we are trapped in a freezing anticyclone with peak electricity demand and no wind power
Paul , northwich, england
Another article from a politician, Ex in this case I know, that appears completely divorced from the reality of most peoples lives. How do any of these ideas relate to somebody like me who lives in a terrace house in a city and whose gross annual income is less than what he spent on his ground heat scheme. Come on Matthew, if you want to do some good, tell us how government offices are going to become carbon neutral. That would provide a lead for the whole country.
Peter, Newbury, Berkshire UK
15000 government types in Bali. That's about 75 each for the countries that count. Taxpaying eople by airline tickets but it's the politicains and their groupies who travel. And did the media increase the absudity by sending so many more to report on the hand fed press releases from the Bali bash?
jj, Cambs, UK
I can believe you're saying it -- you became a statist long ago. Why don't you just admit it?
Scott Campbell, Nottingham,
Please force us to go green?
What next, pink?
Colin Miles, Charlotte, NC
Alongside road pricing we need to admit that the half-privatisation model of public transport has failed. It has left the travelling public in the hands of private companies who compete for custom from the state, not from their passengers. Small wonder that customer service is a foreign concept for these companies.
Let's have either full privatisation with tough laws penalising companies when they fail individual traveleers, or full public ownership. At least then it would be clear who to blame.
Jamie Gilmour, Bolton, UK
The problem is scale. You can't get affordable 'greener' energy in your home while the little companies that make, market and install the kit struggle along with low volumes and need enormous margins on each job to make a decent return. What's needed is huge scale, at least 10,000 times the present volume of heat pumps, baby turbines or whatever. That would allow for standardisation, really good design, international (Asian) manufacturing participation and lower installation costs. The Germans have the right idea in their subsidy system, but perhaps the combination of very high gas, oil and electricity prices with initial subsidies will drive events in this direction. In 10 years these technologies will be commonplace and we will not be pumping so much gas from Europe. Some leadership from our government might be helpful, though, or perhaps it will be 25 years.
Colin c, Shrewsbury,
Another boring article from: green, global warming, people on bicycle, eat locally produced veg and fruit, genetically engineered foods, health & safety issues, IVF, the England football manager.
It is like watching Dulux non-drip dry.
Amuse us, for a change. It is almost Christmass lets have some bunter and joy.
Romolo, Derby, Calamatta
So, Suzie of Sevenoaks, how many of us have the ENORMOUS amount of land required to implement ground-source heating?
Bruce Robertson, Brighton, UK
Acutally, it IS governments who buy airline tickets. The proponents of higher airline taxes are big business, you and GB who do not pay for their own tickets.
I live in Belfast and take 25 mins to get to Manchester, rather than two days.
Merry snobbery
John, Belfast
John B Byrne, Belfast, UK
i usually agree with you matthew, but you're dead wrong here. you are one of the top 1/2 of 1% of people who can offord to pay more for keeping warm. live in a coucil flat, or an edwardian terraced house like me if you want to cut your carbon. walk to work, take less than one flight a year. don't force all of us to pay for your guilt.
paulo, coventry, uk
A good article. Not only that, if we all did as Matthew Parris has done, we'd be insulated from Putin's already proven tendency to turn off the supply...
Suzie, Sevenoaks,